images from my first roll of film, help!

You may have told the lab, "no corrections", but all digital images require corrections, many of which are applied within the scanner itself. My personal impression is that most labs automatically overenhance scans; e.g., boost contrast, apply too much sharpening, and in color, apply to much saturation.

If your are unhappy with your current results, try Ilford's Delta 400 of Kodak's TMax 400, both of which have much less prominent grain.

Wallendo said:

You may have told the lab, "no corrections", but all digital images require corrections, many of which are applied within the scanner itself. My personal impression is that most labs automatically overenhance scans; e.g., boost contrast, apply too much sharpening, and in color, apply to much saturation.

If your are unhappy with your current results, try Ilford's Delta 400 of Kodak's TMax 400, both of which have much less prominent grain.

Click to expand...

I, too, have used both HP5+ and Delta 400 in 135 and would be amazed if changing to D400 by itself made much difference. I think the problem lies in the scanning, assuming that the lab processed the film properly which looks likely.

I think the OP needs to have a long talk with the lab about the scans to see if better scans are possible. If the lab says not then I'd seriously consider trying another lab or developing myself and learning how to scan at home. If this is seriously the best grain that the OP can expect and he is not able to change anything then I'd consider going 100% digital. These scans are not doing analogue or even hybrid any favours, in my opinion.

pentaxuser

Wallendo said:

You may have told the lab, "no corrections", but all digital images require corrections, many of which are applied within the scanner itself. My personal impression is that most labs automatically overenhance scans; e.g., boost contrast, apply too much sharpening, and in color, apply to much saturation.

If your are unhappy with your current results, try Ilford's Delta 400 of Kodak's TMax 400, both of which have much less prominent grain.

Click to expand...

One of my friends, a former Kodak employee, does his balancing and other adjustment, and then has told the labs "no corrections". The prints come back and he makes them reprint everything until they finally give in and listen to the instructions. Once a lab has lost money, they listen to him because they want the business and cannot afford more losses. He finally bought a many color ink (8?, 10?, ...) and does the printing himself.

Joel DG said:

I am new to analog photography after spending many years shooting digital. Here are a few images from my first roll of film, shot on a Nikon F3 with either a 28 2.8 AI-s or 50 1.4 AI-s. They are shot with HP5 at 400, and while I expected grain, I most certainly didn't expect this much. Is this normal? They were developed and scanned at a very reputable lab with the instructions "no corrections", and in post I made very minimal changes. In my F3 now is a roll of Tri X that I'm shooting at 1600- should I expect usable images!? Everything I've seen and read tells me yes, but seeing the results of this first roll tells me differently. Thanks!

Click to expand...

Why don't you try again, this time not pushing the film at all? I think you'll find a lot less grain. If you want less grain, pick a lower iso film and shoot it where there's lots of light. Ferrania P30 goes on sale this Thursday. It's very low grain.