Show us yer film shots then!

I put a roll of HP5+ through a Samsung Fino 140 Super, zoom compact. Half were taken on a gloomy day in London and the outher half when I was in Nottingham for a couple of hours on a sunny day.
At first glance the photos look grainy but I think it is reticulation in fact. I had the fim commercailly developed and I feel the chemisty was run a little warm and the wash water a little cold (comapred to the chemisrty) and this has "crackked or glazed" the emulstion.
The camera performed very well, amazing really for what was a cheap compact but it was not overly enjoyabule to use. Just Meh!
Clean edges to the negs, no light leaks, even neg spacing and good focus and exposure acuracy.
001877570015.jpg001877570018[1].jpg001877570019.jpg001877570016.jpg001877570035.jpg001877570025.jpg001877570032.jpg
 
Mostly Vintage Cameras said:
I think it is reticulation in fact. I had the fim commercailly developed
Click to expand...

That's poor for commercial service. Are you prepared to name and shame?

What did you rate the HP5+ at? I have exposed several rolls at 1600 ISO and they don't seem to have excessive grain. But that's developing in DD-X, which the film does seem to like.
 
Are you prepared to name and shame?
Click to expand...
No, This is actually quite common and just an example of commercial black and white developing. The lab I used was no better or worse than many others. They do a splendid job with C41 and are quite cheap. To get a better B&W I would have to have gone to someone specilising in it and paid 3x the price, at least. You do get what you pay for.

I shot at 400 ISO but warm chemistry would effectivly have pushed that to 800 and so the negs are quite dense.
Generally when I take photos they are to show what one can expect of a particular camera and perhaps how to use some of the features. As this is a simple cheap camera that someone getting into film photogrpahy might have as a "my first film camera" and indeed "my first B&W film" using a cheap and cheerful lab is in keeping with what an average or new consumer could expect. In fact most first timers would likley be pleased with these results and I'm not so unhappy with them myself, one thing is for sure looking at them, they are not taken with a phone! Not looking digital or phone like is the aim for many going into film so job done.
 
Mostly Vintage Cameras said:
No, This is actually quite common and just an example of commercial black and white developing. The lab I used was no better or worse than many others. They do a splendid job with C41 and are quite cheap. To get a better B&W I would have to have gone to someone specilising in it and paid 3x the price, at least. You do get what you pay for.

I shot at 400 ISO but warm chemistry would effectivly have pushed that to 800 and so the negs are quite dense.
Generally when I take photos they are to show what one can expect of a particular camera and perhaps how to use some of the features. As this is a simple cheap camera that someone getting into film photogrpahy might have as a "my first film camera" and indeed "my first B&W film" using a cheap and cheerful lab is in keeping with what an average or new consumer could expect. In fact most first timers would likley be pleased with these results and I'm not so unhappy with them myself, one thing is for sure looking at them, they are not taken with a phone! Not looking digital or phone like is the aim for many going into film so job done.
Click to expand...
Wow, it is disappointing to hear that commercial B&W processing is routinely that bad. You have to be way out on the temperatures to reticulate a modern emulsion. :(
 
You have to be way out on the temperatures to reticulate a modern emulsion
Click to expand...
It looks like reticulation to me, but I could be worng. If its not that it's still to "grainy" and the negs too dense for "correct" development so somthing is sub-optimal.
Wow, it is disappointing to hear that commercial B&W processing is routinely that bad
Click to expand...
Thus it's always been, at least since the 80's. C41 is easy, Fuji, Kodak, 100ISO, 800ISO it all goes through the same chemistry for the same time and temperature. It's a standardised process and suppliers of the chemistry often provide quality courol monitoring to the labs. Also C41 is by far the most common and so it's what labs are geared up for. B+W needs different times for different films and maybe even different chemistry. Plus it's low volume so not standardised in the same way. There are labs that will do the job as I would do it at home but boy do they charge for it and rightly so. Running maybe one or two films through largely by hand and keeping note of the ideal time and a range of different developers costs money.

If you only want to pay around £10 for ev and scan you are going to get an averaged-out development process not a bespoke one for each film type. As film photography has become more of an enthusiast pastime I do see some of those enthusiasts setting up shop so oddly it's easier today to get good B+W developing than say 30 years ago but it’s a labour of love and I don't think many small specialist labs are going to get the volume they need to stay afloat unless they charge for what is a custom service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top