How to get good colour from film?

michelleg · Nov 5, 2010

I have just got my first colour negs and scans back and well, they are quite blue! Pretty underexposed too even though I over exposed by a stop, it wasn't enough. How is it possible to get good colour back from the lab? I used an expensive pro lab in london, but I think it will be impossible to find a lab like Richards that everyone raves about and which I see such good scans from - unless they have been photoshopped afterwards!

Is there a knack or secret to shooting colour film? A great lab in the UK you can recommend? I would like to shoot colour but don't want to do lots in photoshop as that for me defeats the object. I'm shooting portraits on fuji 400.

Thanks

holmburgers · Nov 5, 2010

What's true in analog printing is true in a hybrid workflow as well; you have to dial in the color balance! I think if you sit down at the CPU and figure out how to tweak the color, you'll see that your pictures can look just as good as anyone's. And once you figure it out it's a fast process. If you're scanning, you have to accept at that point that it's basically a digital picture (but that's not to say there is no virtue in shooting film!)

It's amazing, I do my own scans, and at first they all look like rubbish; but after figuring out the brightness/contrast and color balance, you can make them look as good as when you took the picture.

That being said, making the right adjustments 'in-camera' can make the rest a whole lot easier. Filters are a big part of this, and if it's color-negative film, over-exposing will help to eliminate the blue cast. Try shooting it as though it was 200 ISO.

Cheers!

P.S. some people might dog on you for discussing scanning on APUG since technically that's a "hybrid" topic, but you're here and you're shooting film, so it's cool in my book

Diapositivo · Nov 5, 2010

Scanning negatives and obtaining a good colour balance is more difficult than scanning slides. If you want to have scans performed by somebody else I suggest you try slides. Slides require a more accurate and thought about exposure, but then it is easier to match the scan to the slide.

Generally speaking if you intend to take pictures on film regularly and then have them scanned, I think you would save a lot of time and money, and frustration, doing the scanning work yourself. You can find affordable, if not cheap, scanners on auction sites and in the long run they will pay for themselves.

Fabrizio

michelleg · Nov 5, 2010

Thanks Lawrence, I'll go and hide under a bush somewhere! I promise I only got the negs scanned low res so I could then decide what I wanted printed by the lab. I don't know how else I would know what I wanted printed!

I did expose my 400 film for 200 iso, but I think I need to experiment with what looks good. So, if I decide I wanted a hand print of my daughter done by the lab, would they correct the colour etc, or am I way off the mark and thinking too digitally? It think I'll shoot B&W tomorrow!

dehk · Nov 5, 2010

michelleg said:
I'm shooting portraits on fuji 400.

Thanks

Yeah i shot 4 rolls of 120 Pro 400 H the other day, wasn't impressed with my scans either. Besides they underdeveloped my stuff. A bit of messing around to get it look right on the computer.

Casey Kidwell · Nov 5, 2010

There's a lot of steps here. First, I'm assuming you used film that wasn't too old or heat damaged. And film cameras have no auto white balance so you have to take into account the light you're working with. And you've already said your negatives were underexposed so don't expect perfection this go round. Depending on how the film was scanned there are quite a few proprietary softwares which automatically do any number of things (or not) such as grain and noise reduction, color correction, etc. And for reasons that someone more knowledgeable than me will probably point out, any scans I've had to do work on have mostly been too blue. Especially on older film. So I would make sure i had fresh film, good light, proper exposure and hit it again. Also, these films were designed to be printed not just end up as scans. And I realize the majority of commercial printers now have an initial scan and expose onto paper with beams, but having the direct prints seems to make a difference for some reason. It certainly gives you more to gripe at the lab about. So you might have a roll printed before you do anything else just to see. Just start from the beginning again approaching it scientifically and you'll find the weak link.

perkeleellinen · Nov 5, 2010

michelleg said:
A great lab in the UK you can recommend?

I mostly do optical printing with Pro 400H but I've paid for lab scans a few times. I use Peak Imaging, and the scans have never been blue. I usually over expose by 1/2 stop.

http://www.peak-imaging.co.uk/

mr rusty · Nov 5, 2010

try sending a film to photo express in Hull - £4.50 develop and scan at 3000 x 2000 http://www.photo-express.co.uk/index.html

I find their colour scanning is just fine. check out "dry grass" in my uploads for a recent one on ektar 100

holmburgers · Nov 5, 2010

Any chance you can share an example?

What kind of light were you shooting under?

hpulley · Nov 5, 2010

Did you get prints too or just scans? Can you scan them yourself at all? I keep telling people if you aren't going to print them yourself you should at least scan them yourself as some adjustments made while scanning are difficult or impossible to make afterward.

I've had good results with Fuji 400 though through many years I've always preferred Kodak for skin tones and Fuji for landscapes. Haven't shot people in color in a while though so things may have changed.

michelleg · Nov 5, 2010

Casey - thats my problem, first roll and I want perfection!! I buy my film online, so I guess I don't know how old it is, but the B&W I have had from them seems to have been OK. You've given me a few things to think about - I should get some prints done to see how they look.

Thanks Steve & Mr Rusty for the lab recommendations - I'm sure I'll try them out.

I just got the scans at this point to select what I'd like print, which isn't much as my daughter was quite squinty!

michelleg · Nov 5, 2010

Just adding a couple of examples.

holmburgers · Nov 5, 2010

Hmm, honestly I like the amount of blue.

But that being said, it appears overcast slightly, and you're in England, so isn't that how it's supposed to look??

Just joshing ya!

You could take that tinge away *very* easily by lowering the color temperature (raising red/yellow)

perkeleellinen · Nov 5, 2010

You see blue in those photos? Maybe because my screen isn't calibrated, but looking at the girl's skin, I can't see any colour casts. The surrounding green in a little flat, but I think if that was warmed up the skin tones would become very ruddy.

perkeleellinen · Nov 5, 2010

Actually, looking again it is a little cool. Not much though. I looked at the photo through the Kodak print viewing filters and if this was a darkroom print, I'd be subtracting 5cc yellow (or adding yellow in photoshop), subtracting red (adding red) made the girl's skin go very red.

hrst · Nov 5, 2010

Kodak films might have a bit warmer color palette in average if you like it more. Personally I like the cold hue of your greens very much.

However, you should take your time in postprocessing phase to achieve the color balance you want. In darkroom, it is quite simply done using only two dials - magenta and yellow. However, as you are scanning and not printing optically, it will take a bit more than just that, and your question is better suited on APUG's sister site hybridphoto.com .

michelleg · Nov 5, 2010

Holmburgers - sorry for calling you Lawrence! I just clocked that is your location, not name! I've raised the red and yellow and it looks much, much better to my eye.

So would a lab know what looks good and correct the colour on prints, or is it down the photographer to access the scans and guide the lab if a print from the negs is wanted?

holmburgers · Nov 5, 2010

No problem! Lawrence is a good name anyways, so I accepted it.. haha

Yeah, tell your lab what you want and discuss the aesthetics of it. That's all part of the creative process.

And if they don't seem responsive or open to a collaborative discussion, find a new lab!

perkeleellinen · Nov 5, 2010

I imagine that all bar the most expensive and personalised scanning / printing options are mechanised to some degree.

Casey Kidwell · Nov 5, 2010

Those are great images Michelle. They do look a bit under but not much. Is that evening light? I find evening light to have cool shadows. Most good labs will have kind of a group-think about their color. They used to do this through a QC and maximization system but so much has changed not sure how labs develop a standard of color now. Kind of confusing since machines have built in densitometers for paper controls, plug-in no mix chemistry, separate calibrations for monitors, beam focusers and crap like that. If it's worth the time you could have one 4x5 and scan made at different labs and see how they stack up to your tastes.

Athiril · Nov 5, 2010

I'm looking on a Dell U2311h which is basically calibrated out of the box considering how close it is.

Your examples look fine.

Colour looks correct to me, its colder but I wouldnt call it blue cast, you were shooting in 6500K+ light, that is how its supposed to look.

Even when I shoot on my digital SLR, I leave my balance to daylight and do not filter either, but to me 6500K is supposed to look like 6500K (tungsten is a different story)

I'm guessing you wanted something like this:

While we dont discuss digital technique here, I can describe the differences between the what you had and what you "wanted" in the example I gave, the "black level" (or dMax values) of green and blue is slightly different, slightly more so with blue.

michelleg · Nov 5, 2010

Thanks Casey - it was afternoon light, about 2.30pm I think. The light was tricky as the sun was in and out the clouds constantly.

michelleg · Nov 5, 2010

Thank you Athiril for taking the time to play with my photo. It does look better and its good to know its not way off, just different from what I usually produce, so its getting used to a new way of how to make things work for me and look like how I want them to look. Thanks to the poster who suggested hybrid photo. It will be a useful reference for any digital questions.

wblynch · Nov 5, 2010

If you're using Photoshop try out the Photo Filters. You might simply apply a little yellow or warming filter to get what you want.

For your camera, I think a physical filter on the lens would do the same thing.

markbarendt · Nov 5, 2010

michelleg said:
How is it possible to get good colour back from the lab?

Simple, you have to talk with your lab about what you want.

Have you told them that they were too blue?

How to get good colour from film?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency