claire_jacoby

<p>Thanks so much for all the responses; I appreciate the input and you have all given me several options to consider.</p> <p>For those wondering: I shoot color negative film on an old Nikon FM (its meter is broken). Mostly landscape, some portraits. I'm not really doing anything fancy, I'm just interested in something more reliable than guessing/using my iPhone.</p>

<p>I'd love recommendations for a trusty and cheap (under $100 at least, under $50 even better!) light meter. I'm a beginner and I've (lately) had good luck with my own guessing and an iPhone Light Meter app, but I'd like something more accurate. I've had Sekonic, Minolta, and Pentax brands recommended to me before but I'm not really sure what I'm looking at... so I'd love more input.</p>

<p>Allen Ross thank you for that very thoughtful response! Really appreciate it! Would've replied sooner but haven't been on this forum in quite a while.<br> So I switched labs in the last month... Cost me a bit more but the difference is INCREDIBLE (I've only uploaded 2 new photos, but just compared to my old photos on flickr the quality is much better:<br> <p>I mean, I think I'm also getting better with dealing with lighting,etc. But there is quite a big difference between the quality of the images at the new lab I tried and I am really impressed with how lovely the colors look in my recent photos. Now I can focus on the mistakes I make instead of wondering if it was merely a processing or scanning error :). Thanks to everyone who gave advice!</p>

<p>Thanks Tim for taking the time to explain that more to me. I really do appreciate it. I'm going to get some negs re-scanned in a couple weeks and I'll try again and see what happens!</p>

<p>Tim, that's great thanks again for your input! What a big difference with those photos. Ok, so bear with me because I am truly illiterate to the world of photo editing: what does "clipping" the black and white points actually, literally mean? I mean, maybe I don't need to know, really, but I just would like to understand it. Is there a situation in which this would be appropriate for a photo, and/or why would a lab do that? </p>

<p>Alright, coming back to this thread for a little more advice -- didn't feel it warranted a whole other thread. I will be trying some new labs, but I'd also like to know what I should specifically communicate to them about what I want out of my scans. I'm also contemplating having the lab I just used to re-scan some of these and/or provide me with some feedback on how they process and scan (since I don't have any information on that front).</p> <p>I just got back some photos I shot on Ektar100, and there were a few really beautiful shots -- all of these "good" shots featured little to no sky in the frame. But, again, all of the other "bad" scans were SUPER contrast-y and super washed-out... maybe more so than the Portra400 shots. I realize I am photographing tricky subjects: black cattle, white horses, and BIG bright skies... but I don't believe that blue sky has to be stark white, and my colors extremely bleached out. This is the stuff I want to shoot, and I am working on my technique and how to work with the sun/light. I just want to be able to communicate better with whomever is doing the scanning about what I want. Can I just tell them I want warmer, bolder colors; that I don't want my photos hyper-contrasted? I honestly do not know enough about the technique behind processing/scanning and I want to know more about it (so I don't come off as a complete moron who is maybe just awful at photographing things).<br> Are there any online resources for understanding either 1) the scanning process or 2) shooting in harsh light that I can be directed to?<br> What kind of questions would you ask a lab before getting your photos scanned there?</p> <p>These are the "bad" blown-out/contrasty Ektar100 photos*. The first 13 photos (starting with the 2 horses and ending with the 3 horses): https://www.flickr.com/photos/nataliejacoby/</p> <p>*I was especially surprised how the photo numbered 76000028 came out so bad, as the lighting was beautifully golden and soft just before the sun set. I previously have gotten great results at this time of day, including some of which were on this roll (those, again, featured hardly any sky).<br> *Please ignore the one inside the garage, which is the least contrasty (again, no sky!) and a weird lighting situation anyways...</p>

<p>Tim, I really appreciate the thoughtful advice and the examples you've shown me -- it's amazing the difference between those photos. I really was unaware scanning could have such a big impact on a photograph (of course it makes sense). To be honest I wish I could do the scanning all myself, but since I'm still in the process of learning the basics I'm really not ready to take on more! <br> I will be taking some negatives to be scanned at a different lab next month; I'm really interested in how they'll compare. (Although I'm a little bummed, as I still have a few rolls of iso100 film in the middle of getting processed at this other place... should've tried a different lab before sending them off!) </p>

<p>James -- those examples really help, thanks! I really did not understand the difference could be so drastic.</p> <p>Andrew -- I guess it's not so much I'm looking for backlit scenes, it's just what I find most of the time! Haha... where I live (in the high plains) it seems the sun is SO HARSH for almost all of the day. It's so hard for me to tell how it's going to affect the film, even when I think I'm somewhere where the light is softer or the shadows are fainter. Clearly, I need a lot more practice figuring out what works. Thanks for your input!</p>

<p>Ok, first: does anyone have advice for where I can mail in my film to be scanned?</p> <p>And yeah, I have been trying to compensate for backlighting but it is obviously not working! The trouble is, everything looks so blown out in pics when I think I'm correctly exposing or slightly overexposing... like this:<br> or this... It seems like everyone thinks overexposing color negative film isn't a big problem, but my photos are so washed out... I mean, the sky is nearly white.</p> <p>This is the best photo/exposure I've been able to capture so far, and even then I'm not sure it's perfect but the color is there:<br>

<p>Thank you Les! That horse looks so much better! To be honest, I'm not sure the process/equipment that is used to process and scan these -- I live very far from any city, and I've been sending off film to be developed by The Darkroom (I kept seeing it pop up as a reputable lab on blogs). I just order standard scans for small prints, so I'm next expecting tremendous resolution; but I was still surprised by the grain. I'm very new to film photography (I used to do moving image film several years ago, worked in video production for a while... but I found a Nikon FM and have since started experimenting) and I really don't know much about what makes a good scan! And I just can't tell the difference between photographer error and scanning quality.</p> <p>Also, even though I've used the Adobe suite for many years... none of that has been in the way of image editing for still photographs. If you have any advice or know of resources to learn how to do image editing, I'd love to know!</p> <p>(Oh, and perhaps what you're seeing on the photo of the two cows is a strand of barbed wire out-of-focus in the very near foreground... I was shooting between several layers of fence wire and not being especially careful about what was in the frame! But I thought the photo was a decent example of how little detailing I'm getting out of my shots. Perhaps this shot also suffers from the direction of the sunlight, but it seems every time I shoot a photo of a dark object there is rarely very much detail in the image. Maybe I'm expecting too much... it's a black cow, after all.)</p>

<p>So I have shot a couple rolls of Portra 400, and it seems like no matter what I do the image comes back faded and grainy. Some of the more problematic shots seem to have a green cast to them. What am I doing wrong? I want to say it is overexposure, but honestly I don't know. And if it isn't greenish, the contrast/detailing of the images also seem to be poor. </p> <p>Here are some examples (the first one being the most green):<br>

<p>That's interesting. I thought it might be something with the sprocket roller, the way it was acting...</p> <p>I'll keep your trick in mind, thanks! I did attempt to rewind the film back up a bit so I could mess with it/attempt to "reload" it... It just didn't seem to work until messing with the shutter speed knob, but that may have been a coincidence.</p>

<p>Sorry, I mistyped -- I can press the shutter. I just can't advance the lever after doing so.</p> <p>UPDATE: SORRY again... I wiggled the shutter speed setting and now it IS advancing. But... how did I manage that?! I'm certain I tried adjusting the shutter speed before and it didn't help. But now it does. Hm. </p> <p>I'd still like some insight on what may be causing these advance lever problems. I'm going to be able to take it to a camera shop next month, but I'm curious and I still want to take photos before then.</p>

<p>I've had trouble with my advance lever in the past while in the middle of shooting a roll. I've either wiggled it around or opened up the bottom and moved a little lever that was getting caught. The last couple rolls I've shot, I've had no problems.</p> <p>Today I put in a new roll of film, went to advance the lever once (it worked) and then it got stuck when I tried to do it again. Opened up the bottom thinking it was the same little lever that was getting caught... but it isn't. Nothing is moving at all when I attempt to move the advance lever. Can't press the shutter.</p> <p>Opened up the back of the camera, everything is loaded just fine. Sprockets lined up, etc.</p> <p>Any ideas as to what happened?</p> <p>I know I know -- take it to a store/lab to have it checked out. But I live at least 4 hours from a place... I live in the literal middle of nowhere. I'd like to see if there is something I can try on my own.</p>

<p>I had no idea the meter will wrap at some point, Glen! Thank you for explaining that to me.<br> <br> Glen & Stephen -- I did check the shutter times and they seem to be correct, so that is good to know.<br> <br> Bethe -- I really do think that my meter was my problem. I just didn't think to test it out very much before I shot my first roll; I was so focused on wondering if the camera itself could still take photos! Thanks for the advice on good handheld meters.<br> <br> Thanks again everyone for your thoughtful insight. I did have one last question: I mentioned in my first post that a couple times the advance lever jammed; the first time it unjammed itself, but the second time I had to open up the bottom of the camera and wiggle the lever to get it moving (as a result, I lost a frame from light leak... at least, I think that is how it got messed up). Is there a way I can prevent this from happening again? I'd hate to keep having to lose frames just because of a little catch in the gears... Is there something I can do that will prevent it from happening as often?</p>