Portra 160 | Crawfish Eating Contestant | Questions

[GrantYoung]

I took this photo, nailed focus, nailed exposure, just plaing enjoy this photo. My issue is this....why is it so blue?? It seems the colors are muted in general, but more so covered in a blue hue. Any tips? Fixes? Reasons? I'm guessing it could be my lab?


CrawfishChamp by Grant Young Photography, on Flickr

 

[okto]

That looks overexposed on my monitor. Did you have a skylight filter on the lens? Summer day like that is going to have tons of UV light, and film tends to be oversensitive to blue light.

 

[Chan Tran]

It looks like it printed or scanned very light if you scanned from the film. As for the color it needs to be correct during printing and or the scanning from film. The contrast is low so I don't think it's overexposed.

 

[summerbee]

do agree with prev poster: nothing really wrong, just a lil overexposed shot, and many cameras would work like this in that conditions. On my monitor I can't see any real "cast" of blu on the image...

 

[GrantYoung]

That looks overexposed on my monitor. Did you have a skylight filter on the lens? Summer day like that is going to have tons of UV light, and film tends to be oversensitive to blue light.

No filters, just bare lens on my Yashica D.

Take a look at the gentleman's left arm. It is exposed just right. His shirt is white and it's going to blow out a bit becasue of that. Was the sky light blue or dark? I don't think there is anything wrong with your negative. It's what was done to it afterwards. Was it scanned too light? Did you tweak it with software?

I was using the Sunny/16 so the exposure is withing a 1/3...or should be. I may could have dropped it 1/3 to gain some saturation...but I think I need to learn to scan better. I really don't know how to scan "darker" as I am the only film guy I know right now in my area. Trying to meet more to learn this kind of stuff. Should I have a few prints made with color correction done to see what things should be like?

 

[summerbee]

thats why i am NOT looking for any scanner (if not an eventual low cost one for websharing):
managing colours in digital is an ugly beast imho... so many different steps and parameters in play...

 

[Chan Tran]

I can be sure that the negative was not overexposed, if anything it's a little underexposed. If a negative was overexposed then the shadow area would have excellent details but it's not so in this case there isn't much details in the shadow.

 

[Chan Tran]

thats why i am NOT looking for any scanner (if not an eventual low cost one for websharing):
managing colours in digital is an ugly beast imho... so many different steps and parameters in play...

So you make your own RA-4 prints? Because getting the correct color balance in the analog world is not an easy task and every single adjustment made is a wasted sheet of paper and chemical.

 

[Vonder]

Scanning color negatives is a challenge, no doubt. I scan hundreds of rolls of film every year and sometimes it just won't come out right at scan time. In Photoshop it's relatively easy to correct, often by clicking "Auto-color" or by setting the white point using curves. When printing it's also easy, just dial in more of the color you want to take out. I think you should take or mail this negative to a proper lab and have them print it. If it's still too blue they can correct it.

On a side note, that's an excellent photograph. I share in your joy - sometimes nailing the focus is a prize in and of itself!

 

[summerbee]

So you make your own RA-4 prints? Because getting the correct color balance in the analog world is not an easy task and every single adjustment made is a wasted sheet of paper and chemical.

nah, I was in digital for a brief while and soon moved back to analog B/W. I am actually starting to make my hand on printing in black. I'll keep on shooting some trasparencies and some digital if I really need colours.
Next step planned is developing colour film and slides my own... probably next year.
If I'd really need to print something in colours I know a pair of profs who will give me their help (for money of course...)

Moneywise a capable PC + a good storage device + a good scanner + a decent monitor + the tool for balancing colours + a decent printer + papers and inks...
well, perhaps you can waist that pair of prints and still be on a bargain :confused:

 

[heterolysis]

In Photoshop it's relatively easy to correct, often by clicking "Auto-color" or by setting the white point using curves.

After hours upon hours of playing with curves for colour scans, I have honestly found that just hitting auto colour and auto tone are often enough. If you have a newer smartphone, try viewing it on there as the screens are often crisp and you won't be picking it apart as a 1:1 reproduction.

It's a wonderful candid and I think it's metered just fine

 

[Tom1956]

Having been a printer who does this every day with product labels, All yu can do is bring it into photoshop and hit auto color. You can twiddle and fool till the cows come home, but nothing is going to make a scanner compatible with a film or print. This alone gives me cause to have little regard for digital imaging of any kind. I have absolute zero intention of buying a so-called photographic grade scanner. Having said that, to the extent we are communicating amongst ourselves with help from these scanners, they do serve at least a meager purpose.