Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: What negatives to use and where to develop

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Lakeside & Suzhou-China
    Posts
    117

    Default What negatives to use and where to develop

    Please help me out here, been shooting 3 rolls of Kodak Max 400 and found that the pix were grainy and dull (not much colour and contrast). Is it because of the film or the lab?? I've used fuji 100 before and found that SOME pix are contrasty. Any comments on this??

    I'm staying on campus in NUS, any recommendations for a good lab (and preferably cheap ) nearby??

  2. #2
    ClubSNAP Idol Adam Goi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    5,682

    Default Re: What negatives to use and where to develop

    Originally posted by Mudpool
    Please help me out here, been shooting 3 rolls of Kodak Max 400 and found that the pix were grainy and dull (not much colour and contrast). Is it because of the film or the lab?? I've used fuji 100 before and found that SOME pix are contrasty. Any comments on this??

    I'm staying on campus in NUS, any recommendations for a good lab (and preferably cheap ) nearby??
    For your Kodak Max problem, it's due to the film...

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    try Fujifilm NPH400 Pro film... it's my fave colour neg. try developing on Kodak Royal paper or Fuji Crystal Archive paper. beautiful results.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Under your skin
    Posts
    533

    Default Re: Re: What negatives to use and where to develop

    Yeah,

    My experiences with the MAX 400 show that it has very low tolerance (latitude) for shots which are underexposed. It gets grainy in low light conditions. (Unforgivable for a 400 film)

    However, in outdoor shots with bright sunlight, the film performs respectably well.

    NPH 400 is great for indoor Portrait shots. A favourite among Wedding photographers.


    What kinda shots are you taking? Indoor, Outdoor, Portrait, Sports, Archi, Landscape, Macro..?

    enjoy!
    rOCh


    Originally posted by AdamGoi


    For your Kodak Max problem, it's due to the film...

  5. #5

    Default Re: Re: What negatives to use and where to develop

    Originally posted by AdamGoi


    For your Kodak Max problem, it's due to the film...
    will rating it at EI320 solve most of the problems? i'm switching over to Fujifilm from Kodak for ISO 400 onwards

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Re: Re: Re: What negatives to use and where to develop

    Originally posted by mervlam


    will rating it at EI320 solve most of the problems? i'm switching over to Fujifilm from Kodak for ISO 400 onwards
    For that MAX 400, which is horribly horribly grainy, and has very, very little tolerance to underexposure, you probably need to rate it at EI 200.

    Try the Fuji Superia XTRA 400 or better still, NPH 400 Professional for much better results. Note: The XTRA 400 appears to have higher contrast and saturation. Whether it's a good thing depends on your personal preference. I tend to prefer NPH for portraits and weddings.

    Regards
    CK

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default Not very fair

    Hi

    i think it's not very fair to compare a Kodak consumer film with a Fui professional emulsion and come to the conclusion that the Kodak film is crap while the Fuji one is far and away superior.

    Certainly Fuji NPH and Kodak MAX are really 2 very different beast, the former the pro negative film of choice for wedding and portraiture, while the latter, being positioned as mass market for consumers. It is even in those instant one time use throw away cameras.

    You can buy Kodak MAX off almost any shop that sells film; you can get them bundled in boxes for ridiculously low prices, and you can find them all over. It is first and foremost, meant for your less savvy aunties and uncles who own automatic compact cameras.

    For taking photography to the masses, i think the film, (and Kodak), deserves a little more credit than that.

    Certainly if it does not meet up to your standards you should change to a different emulsion, but if u want to move to Fuji pro films, know that there are equivalent Kodak Pro films of similar speeds that work just as well, if not better.

    Just don't draw incorrect conclusions about any manufacturer by comparing products aimed at different market segments.
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  8. #8

    Default Re: Not very fair

    Yup, stop Kodak bashing

    i started with Kodak Max 400, when correctly exposed, it looks okay but rather flat. But when i started using the Fuji X-TRA 400, everything looks vivid and colourful.....

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Jurong
    Posts
    230

    Default Re: Re: Not very fair

    Originally posted by mervlam
    Yup, stop Kodak bashing

    i started with Kodak Max 400, when correctly exposed, it looks okay but rather flat. But when i started using the Fuji X-TRA 400, everything looks vivid and colourful.....
    If it is not underexposed, Max400 can produce very good prints also. I have a 8R from it that is pin sharp (still some grain at the out of focus area which is expected for a 8R from a 35mm ISO400 neg film). a 1/2 stop under and u will be doomed.

  10. #10
    chouputra
    Guests

    Default

    I use Kodak Royal Gold 400. Never took a bad picture with it before.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Re: Not very fair

    Originally posted by Red Dawn
    Hi

    i think it's not very fair to compare a Kodak consumer film with a Fui professional emulsion and come to the conclusion that the Kodak film is crap while the Fuji one is far and away superior.

    Certainly Fuji NPH and Kodak MAX are really 2 very different beast, the former the pro negative film of choice for wedding and portraiture, while the latter, being positioned as mass market for consumers. It is even in those instant one time use throw away cameras.

    You can buy Kodak MAX off almost any shop that sells film; you can get them bundled in boxes for ridiculously low prices, and you can find them all over. It is first and foremost, meant for your less savvy aunties and uncles who own automatic compact cameras.

    For taking photography to the masses, i think the film, (and Kodak), deserves a little more credit than that.

    Certainly if it does not meet up to your standards you should change to a different emulsion, but if u want to move to Fuji pro films, know that there are equivalent Kodak Pro films of similar speeds that work just as well, if not better.

    Just don't draw incorrect conclusions about any manufacturer by comparing products aimed at different market segments.
    Even when compared to CONSUMER Fuji film, the Superia XTRA 400 at a measly $3.50 each or $10 for 3 rolls, it still loses out. It's just a horrible product to begin with. Maybe the "New and Improved" one is better, but for sure, the previous one is really, really bad. You really got to use it in varied situations to see it's effect. In bright daylight, no problems. Indoors, even if you don't underexpose, the shadow areas show significant grain. It's the grainiest ISO 400 film I've ever encountered.

    Regards
    CK

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Lakeside & Suzhou-China
    Posts
    117

    Default Re: Re: Re: Re: What negatives to use and where to develop

    Sorry for my absence, wasn't around the pass few days.

    Originally posted by rOCH


    What kinda shots are you taking? Indoor, Outdoor, Portrait, Sports, Archi, Landscape, Macro..?

    enjoy!
    rOCh

    Most of my pix are indoors and at night, snapshots of my life in NUS. Don't have much time to go out nowadays because I'm busy with my IA and my Orientation Committee.

    Originally posted by ckiang


    For that MAX 400, which is horribly horribly grainy, and has very, very little tolerance to underexposure, you probably need to rate it at EI 200.

    2 questions:

    1. If the negative is underexposed, even by 1/2 stop, can't it be corrected during the development process? Or because after correction, it becomes very grainy??

    2. What is the EI thingy?? How to rate/set it??

    Thanks for all your answers!!!

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Lakeside & Suzhou-China
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Oooh from 400 to 200 is 2 stops? I tot only 1 stop.

    Should I set exposure compensation under all circumstances? Indoors and outdoors?? I've still got 2 more rolls of it...

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Lakeside & Suzhou-China
    Posts
    117

    Default

    heh
    Then should I have exposure compensation on all the time???

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What negatives to use and where to develop

    Originally posted by Mudpool
    Sorry for my absence, wasn't around the pass few days.



    Most of my pix are indoors and at night, snapshots of my life in NUS. Don't have much time to go out nowadays because I'm busy with my IA and my Orientation Committee.

    2 questions:

    1. If the negative is underexposed, even by 1/2 stop, can't it be corrected during the development process? Or because after correction, it becomes very grainy??

    2. What is the EI thingy?? How to rate/set it??

    Thanks for all your answers!!!
    [1]. It has to do with the grain structure of the Max 400 film. Can't really be corrected during processing. Fuji Superia X-TRA 400 does not seem to have such a problem. Maybe the "New and Improved" version has improved things, I dunno. I'd rather keep away from it.

    [2]. EI = Exposure Index. You simply set it by changing the ISO setting of your camera (e.g. setting ISO to 320 or 250 for ISO 400 film). Cameras which determine film ISO solely by DX coding only will not be able to set this. The only way round it is to set your exposure compensation to +1/3 or +2/3 instead.

    Regards
    CK

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    East
    Posts
    86

    Default

    T- Max is affordable film to use or to begin with, If you are really interested in getting better films. I recommend you to try Kodak Tri-X or Tri-X plus, Fuji Scala 200(B/W slides), illford Delta.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Lakeside & Suzhou-China
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Thanks for the suggestion panz.

    Ckiang: I'm getting blurred liao. The problem is with underexposure right? so shouldn't the exposure compensation be set to + instead?? My F65 not so good, can only set in 1/2 stops

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Mudpool
    Thanks for the suggestion panz.

    Ckiang: I'm getting blurred liao. The problem is with underexposure right? so shouldn't the exposure compensation be set to + instead?? My F65 not so good, can only set in 1/2 stops
    Sorry, my mistake. Should be PLUS 1/3 to 2/3. I'll amend the original post.

    Regards
    CK

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Lakeside & Suzhou-China
    Posts
    117

    Default

    thanks for all the advice

    But where to develop? Looking for a place which is near and cheap, AND good quality prints

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •