Why did my film pics come out blue?

<p>Am I just missing something really basic here? I ran a roll of Ektar and a roll of CVS craptastic film thru my new A2e for the first time. I dropped the film off at the Target where I currently have all of my developing done. Included was a roll of Ilford XP2 super that my wife ran thru her new Minolta x-370. Her ilford came back fine, while all of my pics are overwhelmingly blue. All of our pics were developed straight to the same CD. Below is a link to an example.</p>

<p><a href="

<p>I was using a canon 28-105mm mk 1b that I just purchased as the first lens for it. There was no filter on the lens, I have checked and double checked. Does anyone have any idea what would cause this? You can see some other examples next to it as well as a couple I shot on her Minolta. </p>

<p>Developing? Body? Lens? Rouge Smurf?</p>

<p>Well, XP2 is a black and white film. I wonder if the minilab was set for B&W when your rolls went through... though I don't know enough about minilabs to say if that's possible, or if it would explain the blue images from your color film.</p>

<p>If you take the lens off the camera and look through it, does the image seem blue?</p>

<p>If, without a lens or body cap installed, you open the back of the camera and release the shutter while looking through from the back, does the scene seem blue? (I don't know if you can release the shutter with the back open on that model... and I can't think of any reason a camera body would make images turn blue, unless some smart aleck installed a blue filter behind the mirror.)</p>

<p>Thanks Craig. Checked it all...nothing behind the mirror and the lens seems good. Has to be a processing issue at this point. </p>

<p>I had a smilar experience at Walgreens some months ago. Many images had too much blue. There were only a few on the roll that were worth saving so I converted them into B&W and with a couple, I added sepia in post processing. It was definitely not the film, lens nor camera had to be a processing issue.</p><div></div>

<p>This sure wasn't taken with a black and white film unless the C-41 ones are trickier than I thought.So far as I know all the C-41 B&W just go through the processor in the same batches with the color film.</p>

 

<ol>

<li>If it's Ektar, that's notorious for its shift to blue, given sky-lit subjects or shadows.</li>

<li>Pretty nearly everything in your picture is 'coutre-jour' - and so the light falling on the various surfaces <em><strong>is</strong></em> mostly blue colored from the sky, not the sun.</li>

<li>If this is a scan done by the processor onto a CD, then the poor dear's equipment has got itself cross-ways, probably from a conjunction of 1 and 2.</li>

</ol>

<p>I've taken your image and run it through ACR first, and then 'corrected' it up a bit more with more green, red and yellow in the middle range. I have little doubt that what the camera. lens, and film saw was closer to the blue, given the light.</p>

<div></div>

<p>What a disaster! <br /> Bad processing must be the culprit here, especially considering that it similarly affected two different rolls of color film. No way does Ektar look that way, or any other daylight-use color film for that matter.<br /> One other thought- could you have mistakenly used tungsten film outdoors?</p>

<p>How old was the film? It can color shift if it's expired. Also exposure to heat can accelerate the shift. Has it been stored in a closed car in summer?</p>

<p>That shift is pretty extreme though. Maybe they scanned them with the scanner expecting tungsten-balanced scenes?</p>

<p>Was it a roll of Tungsten film?</p>

<p>(Kodak Ektachrome 64T Professional Tungsten balance for example.)</p>

<p>That is balanced for shooting in indoor lights.</p>

<p>Other than that the other posters have offered usable explanations too.</p>

<p>Nope, it wasnt tungsten film and neither roll was expired. It has to be a processing issue since both rolls (ektar and cvs film) came out exactly the same and I have ruled out it being a camera or lens issue.</p>

<p>Thanks to everyone who responded to this. I will just run another roll thru the A2e and have it developed somewhere else to make sure.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>both rolls (ektar and cvs film) <em>came out exactly the same</em> and I have ruled out it being a camera or lens issue.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But the tint is <em><strong>in the negatives</strong></em>, not merely the scan, which is positive?<br>

I'd still suggest that the possibility that the error is in the scanning be cleared first, before concluding the processing is bad.</p>

<p>Probably a processing error (if the scans are good). I suspect that the QC at the labs that places like Target use may not be as good as they once were since I'd assume that the volume of business must be getting close to zero these days. It costs money to keep a film processing line in good condition and you have to run QC checks frequently to make sure the chemicals are fresh. Maybe they're skipping the QC checks if their volume is low. If they screw up the processing they probably try to correct it in printing (or scanning).</p>

<p>I buy Bob's explanation. My local CVS Pharmacy has been doing my processing for me to scan. Just last week I had the exact same experience of blue prints with Ektar, CVS, and Kodak Ultra from three different cameras. In between I had a roll processed at a local Walgreen with normal results. Walgreen printed from one of the earlier rolls, and the prints came out blue, so the color was in the negatives.<br>

I suspect neglect is the cause, for the equipment has several casual operators, and I suspect I was the only one to notice and complain about the extreme color shift. I have not returned to see if they corrected the problem.</p>

<p>JDM- Forgive me for muddying up the terminology. I was lumping developing and scanning together when I said processing. As far as I can tell the negatives seem ok but Im not sure. Im still new to the whole film thing and I cant quite tell if they are messed up. It may actually be the scanning.</p>

<p>Bob/M Howard- Whichever it is, processing or scanning, Im sure your right. Im fairly convinced at this point it was Target. I know the QC at places like this is less then stellar but this is literally an example of I get what I pay for. Im still learning film, and photography in general, so to minimize cost I am using Target because its the cheapest and closest available. About $3.85 to have a roll developed and scanned to CD, no prints. But I accept that things such as my blue day could happen. I pays my money and I takes my chances. :)</p>

<p>Make sure the negatives are actually the problem.<br>

Take the first negs to another store and get a scan/print done to double check that the print, rather than the developing, is or is not the problem.<br>

Once in a great while an employee or trainee can contaminate the autoprocessor chemicals, resulting in color shifts. Processing a roll of slide film through C-41 or negative film through E-6 can produce interesting results.</p>