cheep color negatives?

<p>I shoot a few rolls of cheep film from the dollar store (Likon200ISO) witch where processed at wallmart, unfortunatly the prints came back with bad coloration, I mean the photos are good but the coloration is off. is this a common thing with cheep film? or cauld it be an exposure problem?<br>

also how do I know if my negetives are good?<br>

as always thanks for any help<br>

Rgds</p>

<p>What were the shots of? If film balenced for exposure in daylight was shot indoors without flash in tungsten conditions the color would be off, but I believe that WalMart would correct this.</p>

<p>actualy I spent the entire day shooting ducks in the wild, perfect day in good light.<br>

this is very curious as the best photos I got with the same film was shot at lower ASA140-160. this is why my other thread about playing with ASA.<br>

however I whould still like to know if photo labs cauld be at fault, and if they are should I consider my negatives usless?</p>

<p>They could be at fault. Try having them printed somewhere else. Do you have a way to show us the negatives? Was the film expired?</p>

<p>I only have acces to this pc once in a blue moon, unfortunatly no scan.<br>

man id love to post a few pics.<br>

so Patrick you think the negatives are ok?<br>

I will try to have them scan.<br>

thanks</p>

<p>I don't see why not. I had a problem like this once and I took the negs to the lab I usually use and they printed them fine.</p>

Its probably the printing. As I understand it, the processors today have profiles for specific films. If it doesn't have a specific profile for the film, then there is, for want of a better term, a "generic" profile that is used. This can cause the color to be "off", usually due to a variation in the base mask of the film. When Fuji came on the U.S. market in the early 70's, my mother wanted me to take some photos of a family get together. I was only shooting slide film for color at the time but she wanted prints. I used Fuji print film and when we got the prints back, they had a blue cast to them; the greens were blue green and the reds looked like Crayola red violet. Being a slide shooter, I just thought the film was crap. I found out a couple of years later that it was because the printing machines at the time were set up with filtration for Kodak color film which still had the heavy orange base mask. Because the Fuji film used a different color mask, the cyan filtration to offset the Kodak orange gave the blue cast to the prints.

<p>there is no reason your prints should be blue. All modern minilabs show the images as positives on a display screen and have the ability to balance colors.</p>

Bob, this was years ago. The film was was processed and printed in large commercial consumer labs. Printing was done on print machines that had human operators that printed each frame on long roll paper. In order to color balance, there were controls (like color head enlargers) that dialed in amounts of cym filtration. The way it was usually done was that at the beginning of the day, the operator would use a standard film strip, make prints and adjust the the filtration to get the correct color balance. Since Kodacolor X was the primary color negative film in use at the time, thats what the standard was.