- This topic is empty.
Looking for good labs
-
Ciaran,
I’ll agree with you, consitency is something really lacking from any lab I’ve used. On the whole I’d say Gunnes is one of the better ones as they have some idea and interest in what they do. As for the grain size per roll I can’t say. Developer does make a difference. I know if you use highly dilluted concentrations for longer periods of time with specific developers you will get finer grain results with a higher range of midtones etc…but this is hard to do when a shop does it for you. It really does hurt when a roll doesn’t come back how you exepect it. I’ll always recommend people to process their own if possible (which I know isn’t possible for everyone). Even processing yourself will wield slightly different results each time
Scans can be really inconsistent. I have my own neg scanner and while it isn’t top notch it isn’t bad either but consistency is something I’ve never really gotten from it and I’ve never been happy with anything I’ve gotten from it sadly. I know even with my scanner its so hard to keep it hair/scratch free. No amount of blower brushing and lens clothing is 100% effective. The most consistent scans I get are from negs with dull flat lighting and little contrast.
It must be the static that attracts all the dust back to the scanner? I know its a right pain in the a$$.I know in this day and age where digital is the mainstream it is going to be harder and harder to find good and consitent labs for film. The only thing I can suggest is to get a small tank and develop at home. At least if things don’t work out you have a better idea of where or how things went wrong.
Pete.
pete4130,
I agree that developing you own is a good idea, but provided how houses are built here how can I get a dark room suitable for film? No way with these windows, I’m still fighting with the sun trying not to wake up one hour before my alarm clock sounds :-D
Hi miguev,
I would not expect that Gunns are using Rodinal as their standard developer but would say it is “Rodinal Special” which is a very different developer and produces finer grain.
You don’t need a darkroom to develope film as you can use special changing bags to load the film.
If you are serious about B&W film and want consistant results, then you gotta do it yourself.
Peter
Hi thefizz,
You’re right, they use Rodinal Special, I recall it was Rodinal Something but could not remeber the second part of the name, sorry for the confusion O:-)
thefizz wrote:
You don’t need a darkroom to develope film as you can use special changing bags to load the film.
If you are serious about B&W film and want consistant results, then you gotta do it yourself.
I wholeheartedly agree with Peter on this! This is a point that often seems to be overlooked by people. I personally think it’s more important to develop your own film than it is to print your own prints. After all, the key to good prints is having a great negative to start with. There is a tendency for people to drop the film off at a lab for developing and then they print their own from the resulting negatives. But the lab will only do a standard process. Doing your own developing gives you complete control over the tonal range, density and other factors affecting negative quality. Even basic things such as variations in time, temperature, developer concentrations, agitation and developer choice will make a difference to the final outcome. And like you say, developing your own requires no darkroom. Printing, on the other hand does of course.
Thorsten,
I also agree and wonder where can I get one of these changing boxes and how much should it cost.
miguev wrote:
Thorsten,
I also agree and wonder where can I get one of these changing boxes and how much should it cost.
It’s been some years since I’ve been photo shopping in Dublin, so I don’t know who has what anymore, but I would imagine that Gunnes should have what you need – a changing bag, developing tank, some graduated cylinders to mix your chemicals in and away you go :) Somebody has to supply the photography students in Dublin with their basic kit and I’m sure it’s Gunnes.
Although I’ve never developed my own film, I’d tend to agree. But the problem is, I’m not entirely sure I want to have to master another skill like this, particularly one so smelly ;) In a lot of ways, as much as the inconsistencies bother me, considering the amount of film I shoot, I think I’m happy enough to live with them, but grumble along the way.
Ciaran,
I’ve only developed one roll to date so I’m no expert but there was a buzz in seeing the developed film for the first time when it unrolled.
It’s worth a shot even just the once :)Mark
Mark wrote:
Ciaran,
I’ve only developed one roll to date so I’m no expert but there was a buzz in seeing the developed film for the first time when it unrolled.
It’s worth a shot even just the once :)Mark
I think I’d like to give it a go once, especially if the investment in equipment and chemicals was relatively small. I’ve no doubt there is a real kick having the image appear before your very eyes. Wasn’t there mention before about someone doing a B&W print work shop? :D
ciaran
one of the problems i have found when getting people to do the developing and scanning etc, generally the scan part of the process is not done very well.
I would like to offer to scan a couple of your negs for you and very hi res, on my scanner which is quite a good scanner, just to see if there is a major difference from the scans you got from the company that did the processing for you. Generally a good scan will produce huge ammounts more contrast etc than the ones your gonna get done in a shop
ciaran wrote:
Although I’ve never developed my own film, I’d tend to agree. But the problem is, I’m not entirely sure I want to have to master another skill like this, particularly one so smelly ;) In a lot of ways, as much as the inconsistencies bother me, considering the amount of film I shoot, I think I’m happy enough to live with them, but grumble along the way.
Hi Ciaran,
The chemicals for develping film and paper are not very smelly at all, this seems to be a common misconception by those who havn’t used them before. There is a very light odour but even if that put you off there are some online suppliers who make odourless chemiclas.
Peter
Peter is right here Ciaran, its nowhere as smelly as you think it will be. And you dont need any equipment, the Gallery Of Photography has everything you need. They also do training but you need to book in advance as their b+w developing and printing courses are very popular.
There is indeed a beautiful pleasure in seeing the image appear in front of your very eyes when you do your prints, and the only smelly part I can remember (I did quite a lot of lab around 10-12 years ago) is when I was poor enough to use vinegar in water instead of stopping bath :-D
I will probably bring some equipment from Tenerife unless any of you can tell me how much a 1-roll developing tank is here.
If you want something really smelly try (NO, DON’T TRY IT) to put the paper developer into the fixer bottle xDDDD
My first roll in Gunn’s has the same huge-grain look, but I’m not sure if it’s actual grain or CCD noise on the scan, because there are a lot of pixels with opposite values to the ones aside them. My father –and master– recommended me a Gaussian selective blur with parameters blur radii = 3 and delat max = 176, which I don’t know myself what exactly is but it seems to work pretty well to fight the grain effect, look at this examples: original and filtered. A few more are now the latest on my Flickr collection.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
