How do labs cropped your negatives?


Ha Zu Ni Za

New Member
Apr 9, 2015
142
2
0
Hi there all,

I've been shooting film for quite awhile now and I just want to know: how do the labs here cropped your negatives/scans?

Recently I shot a roll and had it processed and scan. To my dismay, most if not all were out of composition and some parts were chopped off. At first I thought it was my fault. But I vividly remembered how it was shot in the viewfinder. The first few times it happened to me I shrugged it off thinking it might be my skills. But it can't be that bad until now.

Feeling a little bummed I went and checked the negatives. The negatives showed the actual frame that I shot. So yeah back to the question. How do they actually cropped?

Thanks in advance.





Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
 

Srono

Senior Member
Mar 20, 2006
579
0
16
Hi there all,

I've been shooting film for quite awhile now and I just want to know: how do the labs here cropped your negatives/scans?

Recently I shot a roll and had it processed and scan. To my dismay, most if not all were out of composition and some parts were chopped off. At first I thought it was my fault. But I vividly remembered how it was shot in the viewfinder. The first few times it happened to me I shrugged it off thinking it might be my skills. But it can't be that bad until now.

Feeling a little bummed I went and checked the negatives. The negatives showed the actual frame that I shot. So yeah back to the question. How do they actually cropped?

Thanks in advance.





Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
Sometimes it is done automatically by machine. Even if you scan by yourself, with Epson scan software for example, it will automatically crop a lot.
 

Ha Zu Ni Za

New Member
Apr 9, 2015
142
2
0
Sometimes it is done automatically by machine. Even if you scan by yourself, with Epson scan software for example, it will automatically crop a lot.
So basically when I shoot, I have to leave some space for cropping then?

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,895
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
if you are using a 35mm SLR camera, you don't even able to see the whole frame area in the camera viewfinder, most camera only show up about 92%, excepts a few pro bodies like Pentex LX, Nikon F to F6 and Canon flagship pro bodies

and when the labs run the negative thru their film feeds, or even mount the film onto 35mm slide mount, it will show up about the same areas as what you see in your viewfinder. Nobody complains about such issue unless they are using those pro bodies with 100% viewfinder.

if you really want to see 100% on your film, than make your own printing.

btw, do not use 35 film carrier when you make your own printing, use medium format film glass carrier, so you can even able to print the sprocket holes.
 

Ha Zu Ni Za

New Member
Apr 9, 2015
142
2
0
if you are using a 35mm SLR camera, you don't even able to see the whole frame area in the camera viewfinder, most camera only show up about 92%, excepts a few pro bodies like Pentex LX, Nikon F to F6 and Canon flagship pro bodies

and when the labs run the negative thru their film feeds, or even mount the film onto 35mm slide mount, it will show up about the same areas as what you see in your viewfinder. Nobody complains about such issue unless they are using those pro bodies with 100% viewfinder.

if you really want to see 100% on your film, than make your own printing.

btw, do not use 35 film carrier when you make your own printing, use medium format film glass carrier, so you can even able to print the sprocket holes.
That I can understand but the scans that I got and the negative doesn't tally. For example this:
$uploadfromtaptalk1440731251895.jpg

On the negatives, I'm able to see the dog ears. And I'm seeing the actual frame that I took. So I'm wondering if it's the scanner issues or that I must give some leeway for cropping.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,895
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
That I can understand but the scans that I got and the negative doesn't tally. For example this:
View attachment 8924

On the negatives, I'm able to see the dog ears. And I'm seeing the actual frame that I took. So I'm wondering if it's the scanner issues or that I must give some leeway for cropping.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk


this whole image is your negative area, and the picture of dog is occupied about 93% of the whole image, and it is what you suppose to see in a Nikon FM2 viewfinder. The areas in gray is recorded on your film but you don't get to see in viewfinder.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonfmseries/fm2n/fm2manual/index4.htm

So are you saying you can see more than the grey area shown here in your negative?
 

Ha Zu Ni Za

New Member
Apr 9, 2015
142
2
0


this whole image is your negative area, and the picture of dog is occupied about 93% of the whole image, and it is what you suppose to see in a Nikon FM2 viewfinder. The areas in gray is recorded on your film but you don't get to see in viewfinder.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonfmseries/fm2n/fm2manual/index4.htm

So are you saying you can see more than the grey area shown here in your negative?
Yes. That's what I'm saying. I'll upload the negative image when I'm back home later. Most of the shots looks like it was cropped instead of showing the actual image.

I'm shooting with a zorki 4k rangefinder thou.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,895
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
Yes. That's what I'm saying. I'll upload the negative image when I'm back home later. Most of the shots looks like it was cropped instead of showing the actual image.

I'm shooting with a zorki 4k rangefinder thou.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
do you know for rangefinder camera there is a parallax issue? what you see in your finder, it is not exactly same as what your film able to capture.
 

Last edited:

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,895
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
and whether it is scan or print, it won't able to show 100% of the negative or slide able to capture, you go to any labs it is still the same.
 

Ha Zu Ni Za

New Member
Apr 9, 2015
142
2
0
and whether it is scan or print, it won't able to show 100% of the negative or slide able to capture, you go to any labs it is still the same.
Alright understood. So basically I have to give some leeway then, right? And I understand about the parallax error as well thus why I don't shoot up close. I just want to get the best out of my film and not be ruining shots.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
 

kayaro888

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2003
984
0
16
North SG
Visit site
Just check what print size you select? 4R? 6R? 10R?
Cos different print size have different aspects ratio.if you print full page (of whatever size) than automatically the machine will crop the film unless you order the shop NOT to crop any size but you will see top and bottom will have a white (or black) edges
. What I try to say is : the aspect retio of 35mm film and the paper size are not the same, thats why got this problem.
 

Last edited:

Ha Zu Ni Za

New Member
Apr 9, 2015
142
2
0
Just check what print size you select? 4R? 6R? 10R?
Cos different print size have different aspects ratio.if you print full page (of whatever size) than automatically the machine will crop the film unless you order the shop NOT to crop any size but you will see top and bottom will have a white (or black) edges
. What I try to say is : the aspect retio of 35mm film and the paper size are not the same, thats why got this problem.
I usually print 4R. But nowadays I just do scanning. so technically they will have to cropped no matter what right?

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
 

Ha Zu Ni Za

New Member
Apr 9, 2015
142
2
0
and whether it is scan or print, it won't able to show 100% of the negative or slide able to capture, you go to any labs it is still the same.
$uploadfromtaptalk1440768667207.jpg

Here you go. In the negative I can see clearly more of the ears and the toes are not cut off.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,895
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
View attachment 8930

Here you go. In the negative I can see clearly more of the ears and the toes are not cut off.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

your camera frame area is far greater than 36mmx24mm, already touches the sprocket holes. there is no way for any negative carrier to show up the entire area.
 

JGHan

Member
Feb 11, 2012
269
1
18
singapore
www.flickr.com
The frame area positions seem inconsistent. If you notice, margins of the upper and lower borders do not match. There is too much space for the top border while the bottom border is almost non existent. Perhaps you can check your camera's film gate? That said, I've noticed slight crops of my photos when I was still sending my negs to labs to be scanned. I scan and print my stuff now, so I pay close attention to the borders and stuff. I actually had a picture that was highly dependent on the silver of detail near the border of the neg.
 

Ha Zu Ni Za

New Member
Apr 9, 2015
142
2
0
your camera frame area is far greater than 36mmx24mm, already touches the sprocket holes. there is no way for any negative carrier to show up the entire area.
Thanks catchlights. Appreciate for the knowledge and info. Guess now I must learn to take shots by taking a few steps back.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk