Issue with 120 film, advice please

<p>Im an old time photographer and like many I've found my way back to Medium format film.<br>

I'll keep this short, I have a Mamiya RZ67 with a 110 and 250 lens and a Mamiya 7II with 43mm and 80mm lens. I did three B&W test rolls with different camera, lenses and time of day. Used fresh film (Ilford 100)I had my very trusted lab process and return 4x5 prints. This is a large well known lab that has done perfect work in the past for me. This time all three rolls produced VERY flat prints. They look lifeless almost zero contrast. <br>

My question, is this normal for proofs? Negs look ok. I understand they are just proofs but the quality is lifeless. I believe there were enough variables that all three rolls should not be so flat. I ask only because i've been out of the film world so long I don't know if that is acceptable for proofs.<br>

Thanks in advance</p>

<p>If the negatives are fine and show good contrast, I'd go back to the lab and ask them to rescan at their own cost, there's no excuse for bad results from good negatives.</p>

<p>I would go back to the lab and question them on how the prints were made. To get the best feedback on your negatives have them make a contact sheet at paper black with the negatives out of their protective sleeves.</p>

<p>I have to agree. The problem is not the film, or the negatives, or even the processing. Keep in mind, your prints are made from scans, and THERE is the problem. Perhaps someone new to the scan process did your films or there may be a problem with their scanner, but whatever the reason, poor scans are the reason for the flat look. Scanning is an art that is not walked into overnight, though it is not "rocket science" either. It may be that if you, and the lab, consider these as "proofs" only, they made little effort to get the scan process right, but it really should not be that way. This is the sad part of modern film photography, you now have to rely on someone to be in full control of the film to digital conversion, and this opens up such a huge can of worms that I simply no longer cope with it and use digital from the beginning, ... but that is another topic that has been beat to death. You may also want to consider getting a good film scanner and do your negative scanning yourself. Though I have since sold it, I could do far better scans with my former Nikon Coolscan 9000 that anything I could purchase from a lab. The Epson Perfection scanners are pretty much regarded as the best of the flatbed scanners but I would still seek out a high quality drum scan service for any large prints of 16x20 or larger.</p>

<p>It is not always easy to judge negative contrast just looking at them, and even harder reading the description of them.</p>

<p>Some make an "index sheet" which is enough that you can figure out which negative is which, but not otherwise judge the image. Real proofs should be better.</p>

<p>Making 4x5 or 4x6 proofs from every shot on a roll is not standard practice in B&W. It's something typically done at a consumer lab, not a professional lab, and any time I've seen it the quality has been poor. It's most likely done on an automated system where no attention is given to the individual negative or print. Today it might even be done by scanning.<br /><br />With B&W, standard practice is to develop the negative and then make a contact sheet. Once you've looked at the negs and contacts you decide what to print. Then prints are done on an individual basis where the lab person is working on only one image at a time. At least in good labs.<br /><br />Bottom line is that today it's difficult to get good B&W lab work unless you got to a custom professional lab and pay accordingly. Only affordable way to get good B&W is to do it yourself.<br /><br />With the images you've shot, don't worry about the proofs. Look at your negatives. <br /><br />I would not bother going back to the lab to complain about the proofs they gave you. If that you describe is an example of work they would let out the door, they are not a lab you want to be working with.</p>

did you request 4x5s?

 

did you get a cd with the scans?

 

if not, can you scan them on your computer?

<p>I asked for 4x5s. I should have asked for a CD. <br>

Been so long since I used film I never even knew that the proofs are scans. I'm still thinking old school chemistry. <br>

I'm considering just shooting color and converting to B&W post. <br>

This is going to be more of a learning curve then I expected. <br>

Last question, which makes for a better scan. film or transparency? Might be time to invest in a high quality scanner.</p>

<p>Scanning is an art. Depending on the software it can take 8 to 20 hours to get to the point of making good scans.<br>

Slide film is near nonexistent so stick with negative film. I have found that if a negative will produce a good wet print at paper black it will produce a good scan at scan software default settings, its when it requires manipulation to print well that software adjustments are needed to get the detail from the negative. Scan for the most detail from the negative, use post processing software to turn the scan into a good picture. </p>

Since you dont have a darkroom or process your own, stick with the B&W, or if you like color, but let your service give you a CD as your proof set.

 

I do my own processing. I scan my negs to see what I like. Once Ive made my choices I print them in my darkroom.

 

For proofing scans, you really dont need a great scanner. Its only to see what you have n get an idea what you want to wet print. If you are going to post process in photoshop n use those to print from.... well a better scanner needed.

OH BTW.. the scanners the service uses are industrial dedicated film scanners n the quality is very good. Your consumer grade scanner, even if its an expensive one, will never measure up to those... same for their printers.

<blockquote>

<p>OH BTW.. the scanners the service uses are industrial dedicated film scanners n the quality is very good. Your consumer grade scanner, even if its an expensive one, will never measure up to those... same for their printers.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

While this is true, much of the cost of industrial scanners and printers is toughness. They have to hold up to rough, continuous, use. Home scanners, even the high end ones, are not designed for such use. <br>

<br>

The industrial scanner will only stay quality if it has appropriate maintenance. You can't be sure that any specific place does that. <br>

<br>

But do note, for example, that it isn't hard to make a high resolution (lots of pixels) scanner that doesn't position the film accurately enough. Lots of pixels doesn't guarantee that they are in the right place. A good low resolution scanner could be better than a poor high resolution unit.</p>