Negative scan gone bad

Hi everyone :)

 

I recently went to get my film developed and scan the negative.

The scan results I got were bad to say the least. The place that scanned it says that's what the scanner saw, but I don't believe that because I shot with full automatic and always had perfect results, but I had developed and scanned the films at another place.

Also, I used the film Kodak Gold 200

 

I'm gonna upload a few samples and want to get your opinions on this. Would be really helpful.

 

[ATTACH=full]1229298[/ATTACH]

Sample 02

 

[ATTACH=full]1229299[/ATTACH]

Sample 03

 

[ATTACH=full]1229300[/ATTACH]

your samples arent working. perhaps they are too large for PN to display?

your samples arent working. perhaps they are too large for PN to display?

 

Hi Paul,

I dont know they seem to work at my end when I click on the link..should I dropbox them for you ?

I don't see the pictures either.

By the way, one of the reason I don;t like negative film is that you never know what you got. With slides, you see immediately what you got and whether it's good. One thing you could do is bring them to a photo processing place and have them print them chemically, if you can find a place that still does it.

I don't see the pictures. What I get is - "The image ... cannot be displayed because it contains errors."

 

At any rate, showing a positive image from a scan won't tell us what the negative looks like. It could be a good negative with a bad scan or a bad negative with a good scan of the bad negative. So, what does the negative look like compared to other known to be good negatives?. Does it have similar density and clarity?

I don't believe that because I shot with full automatic and always had perfect results,

 

Another thing to consider (without seeing the images): Results from the past are no guarantee for the future. Shooting full automatic means you leave everything to the camera. You have zero control over it, and if anything is wrong with the camera, you've got little feedback on it, so it might go wrong without you knowing. To seriously assess if a service made a mess with either development or scanning of your negatives, I'd for sure take exposures that I set myself (manual, or a semi-automatic mode like A(v) or S/Tv), rather than automatic.

Hi again,

 

For some reason I can't post a dropbox link here, so I took screenshots of the pictures.

Sam

 

ple 02

If you compare these negatives to negatives from the past (shot outdoors) that turned out OK, do they seem clearer/lighter or about the same in terms of how dark or light they are?

 

Offhand I'd say it's possible your camera underexposed these shots. It could also be a problem with scanning but without seeing the negative it's hard to say.

The first image looks underexposed. The camera probably metered the sky behind the gentleman, and to add to the challenge his face is in shadow.

Can you take a photo of the negatives? Seeing them on a lightbox would be ideal, but in a pinch putting them up against a plain white screen on your computer monitor or any other sort of diffuse backlighting would work.