• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

very bad result from my first film

The image of the palm tree looks fine so it's reasonably safe to exclude problems associated with your camera/lens. That's the good news. I suggest a different lab but with another roll of XP2 Super. This is a chromogenic film, not a traditional B/W film. It requires C41 processing. Perhaps your lab had bad chemistry and/or bad scanning. Stick with it, you'll get there...XP2 is a very nice and very foregiving film.
 
In post #22 you are comparing apples to oranges. You cannot compare a black and white image against color and expect to get an accurate comparison. The blacks are super black and any detail is blocked by the scan and post process manipulation by the scanning tech. Whoever processed these for you gave their idea of what he(or she)wanted it to look. You really must do your own work to see what the negatives will render. XP-2 negatives can be printed on traditional photo paper.
 

hello


Iam only compare the results from the same scanner
First one look very good

But the second one

Look from different scanner
 
Its not the scanning machine that is suspect here. The post scanning alterations made the B&W look terrible. You must learn to do your own work, that way you will have the option of smoother gradation shifts. The best thing you can do is learn to print in a darkroom and process your own film and prints.
 
Attached is an example of my experience with xp2...

The top photo is my darkroom variation of the image, the bottom was the c41 print from a machine. I did a lot of dodging/burning on this one.

As you can see, my negs were very contrasty, xp2 in general is very contrasty if you are using a lot of flash like me...

but the good news is you can compensate for that if you print it yourself.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled-1.jpg
    48.9 KB · Views: 105
  • Untitled-4.jpg
    130.5 KB · Views: 97
Vaughn said:
Are you planning on printing these using traditional (wet) photo process? Otherwise you are at the mercy of whatever scanning hardware and software was used to make the CD.
Click to expand...

Actually you're at the mercy of the operator, just like with a printer.
 

The pattern in your photo is from sharpened noise, it isn't grain, the grain is not resolved in that image, shoot me a PM or post on DPUG.
 

Quite possible for both scanning and printing, but as you said, by hand, not by a shop/minilab/etc.

Eg,

Plain Sunset by athiril, on Flickr


jp498 said:
put a digital photo of your negatives backlit, such as taped to a window or something. No telling if it's the negatives or the scans at this point. Get a little closer than I did.

Sort of like this:
Click to expand...

It's scan clipping (software/operator), highlights on a C-41 neg arent going to blow out like that, even my Ektar at least overexposed 4 stops accidentally, still held detail in the highlights like that.
 

Yeah, I agree B&W is better than chromogenic B&W, but chromogenic is a standardised process, all he has to learn correct exposure, then give it a little more (can take much more, but obviously difficulty printing, and will have serious scan noise), C-41 holds highlights to the moon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register