ken_s1

Hi KC

Wow you do have some old equipment there, however I might know of some people in that area - I will check with my contacts and try to get back with you, or simply send a link to them. There are many people out there that do this kind of work ..some are very reputable and worthwhile - I used to work in a lab that had an old 550 - one of the first - it wasn't UL listed at that time.. so you can imagine..

I do not know what Fuji charges you for repairs, but you can expect to pay a minimum of 80 to 100 an hour for an independent..

you can also check http://www.sonman.com/

The closing of plants occurs all the time - and this is no exception - your film will simply be transported to another lab that handles the processing or outsourced to a vendor that will produce the specialty types. Even now not all of the work that is sent in to these labs gets done there. Why do you think that the turnaround times for some work is a number of days rather than overnight!

As for losing Film ... film doesn't just get lost at the Lab - it can be lost at the store before it goes to the lab - it can be lost in transit, it can be lost in transfer (it is also possible it could simply fall out of the bag) - did the lab log in your film ?? Then it is possible it was lost or mixed...

As for people leaving Fuji film in droves - I think you should check your numbers for accuracy before spouting off. Especially since it is made in America, and Kodak film is made in China -- did you read about that!!

Rowland -

I would like to add to your comments on item 11.

Kodak papers have a different spectral response rate than Fuji papers, and the Kodak Film is "centered" to that Kodak Paper spectral response.

If the paper is weak in the blue than the film will compensate for that with the yellow response. Just like Fuji with the Magenta/Green relationship).

The machines in general compensate for this - and digital machines can do a much better job at it (because they have a lot more range.. details here are too much)

The optical equipment is set to a happy medium and can only achieve a compromise however if the negative is normally exposed + or - 2 stops chances are good it will be a very good reproduction of the original negative. It is all in the response match up and how well the machine can compensate for the difference (the machines have limits).

There are alot of factors that go in to centering - or balancing the machines scanner to the paper. This way it looks at the negatives in a skewed manner (skewed by the paper brand/type) too many technical details for discussion here. And this is where most people go wrong when they set up a machine - they might change papers but ignore to change the Scanners filters (it's skewness to the paper) this causes the machine to lose centering and therefore it cannot reach the range necessary to compensate for what it has to do - and the results you get are blah..

Unfortunately most people do not realize the amount of technology that goes into producing accurate photographs .. it is astounding

For Gregg Chappel and Derek C.

Gregg it is nice that you had a good experience at the Fuji Kiosk, did you submit Jpegs or Tiffs ? Also something to note - Digital Images into Prints are much easier to deal with from a "quality Point of View" analysis is much easier for the software to compensate for it.

I would be curious to know what machine produced the prints - would you upload an image of the back of your print on this site, or a link to it somewhere - I would love to know. Or if you could scan a 1 inch by 1 inch of the picture - in very high resolution on a flatbed that would work as well.

Derek C.

What machine do you suppose your digital images were produced on ? I would venture to say the Kodak Mercury 10K printer did the job.

There is a big difference between sending your pictures in to a lab and sending a digital image - a Digital Image can Only be produced on a Digital Printing Machine - a negative could be produced on a half dozen or so machines and then some including vintage 1910's .

A Digital Image can be corrected much better than a "negative" - you say it once was a negative - isn't that the same ? - NO. There is a lot on the digital imaging and printing subject.. and the equipment it is produced on does make a difference - how the equipment is tuned makes a difference -

it is very possible

what do you have on the back of your prints ?

It could be the frame number, color corrections, order number, dealer number etc. etc. etc..

1: Browning on the edges - this looks like a machine failure (the processor) - created by a reflection inside the machine - or even a light "fog" any more questions on this - is only needed by the technical people to repair the machine.

2: Grain - Silver retention in the film can definitely cause a huge problem here.

3: Orange tint - could even be a problem with the paper development.

Take Film back and ask to have it redone make sure they soak the film in bleach, fix and then stabilizer / wash before reprinting - this will ensure that silver retention in your film is not an issue. Then do your self a favor and find a better photo lab to take your film to.

Your point is what ? That the film is a good film - indeed it is.

The comment that the conventional lab would handle the second shot better than the other 2 shots - I cannot agree with - The automated equipment in the conventional lab is very sophisticated equipment, and so is the frontier - the fact is that it is in the scanner and image processing. To understand something about the conventional lab you must also understand the process on the equipment - a full roll negative goes through a high volume (20k prints/hr) machine. There exists a technology some call it order uniformity - whereby the machine compensates its corrections on an order basis for both color and density, there is also some machines that have frame level correction and then there is a third that allows for frame level and order level in increments for both color and density. In effect the technical people of the lab control this response. None of these frames would be difficult to produce on such equipment and achieve similar if not better results.

By the way the color being a bit bluer from the scans - color Gamut is different on the monitor than the paper - you will never get a "True Match" - but if you scan and then print - the prints from your printer should match the print "in theorey" .. you will not be able to tell the difference - it all has to do with the color space.. if you work with Digital - use TIFF files.

Here you go - look at the negatives - if the Negatives are dark you have an overexpose situation - look at the base material (the place where there are no frames) is it dark as well or does it look relatively normal (OD film is known as burned film for a reason).

Exposure time and F-Stop both are critical in exposure so it is possible your calculations were off . Take the film to another Lab and have them produce the same print .. it is possible the balance of the machine was off.

This is not necessarily true .. a PMT does produce a hires scan but there are many types of equipment out there that produce Hi-Res scans and use various technologies that can do it. CCD is one of those - as well as CMOS imagers. It is all about Noise, Dynamic Range and Resolution..

You really need a 16 base scan for what you want to do.

The color Gamut that paper can produce versus what you get from the various scanning technologies is a key component. LAB is a Pro standard and one of the best .. there are others such as sRGB, and RGB - etc..

TIFF files are a better storage format than JPEG (JPEG is a Lossy format),

I wish I could tell you where to go get them done but unfortunately - I do not know of any one in New Mexico.

OK I will give you a brief technical on the Film Paper Issue and leave it at that. Film has a different cast because of the type and the process (kodak or fuji c41)(2 labs that use kodak process can vary, just like 2 labs that use fuji process, you will have different results - just on the film itself from the process.)

The papers have different spectral responses (color) and so do the negatives - and thus the papers are designed to be a "best fit" - if the neg responds more in the blue region the paper may respond less in the blue region (there is a such thing as dynamic range) centering is the basis for getting the best results (which is what color balancing of machines is supposed to compensate for)- so in short there should be no difference. When the technical and Quality people set up the machine that produces your prints there are a lot of factors that affect this - from the machines internals to the Quality control persons knowledge level, and also the reference films that are used (including the age of those reference films) and a whole lot of other details that you really do not want to know.

Fuji Crystal Archive is FUJI CA, and it is Watermarked - RedHue hmm sounds like fog (on the paper) take it back and have them redone.

The Lab should know what they use - and if they do not know what brand the paper is or who it is manufactured by - then they are a button pusher and that is about it. Go to another lab and get the quality you deserve.

I would like to respond to EOS Rules and Biotime Biotime (see a special note for you at the end).

Here is the scoop

1: Gretag Machines that are at Target are minilabs and true, they do have a bad reputation. The digital versions have a much better reputation. Called a MasterFlex Digital.

1A: The NetPrinter 812 is not a "VERY high volume machine" - when we say High Volume 20 thousand prints per hour is HIGH Volume and no minilab can even come close to that and most are lucky if they can break 1500 prints an hour - not even 10 % speed of the HighVolume machines.

2: The machines that are used in photolabs are High Volume Machines minilabs cannot handle 30,000 plus rolls of film a night.

3: The machines that are used are manufactured by Kodak, Agfa and Gretag.

4: The Gretag machines that are in most photolabs are very old and are used mainly for 110 and 126 film printing. (Film Splicing and Film Processing are performed on other pieces of equipment made by various manufacturers.)

4A: There are other Highspeed machines made by Gretag that produce very high quality prints from 135 and reorder negatives.

5: KPP and Regular Processing - same equipment - just an additional inspection (you should get this quality without paying a premium anyway!)

6: Perfect Touch I believe now comes standard on KPP - the printing equipment is different. They use Kodak High Speed Digital Printers - and have many names associated with it - 10k and Mercury are 2 of the names.

7: Gretag high speed machines in the early 80's set the standard for quality and speed. Which is why the Agfa is an almost duplicate form of the Gretag.

8: Gretag Assets were bought out by various companies depending on market wholesale lab (high volume) or minilab.

9: San Marco was at one point part of Gretag Imaging, and was bought out of the bankruptcy.

10: NetPrinter was manufactured out of Denver Co. as a coompany Gretag purchased.. when the bankruptcy occurred they were bought by San Marco.

11: The Wholesale Division was bought by Kis photo-me and is now called Imaging Solutions AG

12: Imaging Solutions produces HighSpeed digital equipment (originally being developed by Gretag - very high quality and high speed) there are several places in North America and Europe that have this equipment.

13: If you have Reorder film - any one in the industry knows the process and the pitfalls, good news however is that there are a couple states where Walmart is your best choice.

14: In the end when you send your work to a highspeed lab - there is no telling what equipment was used to produce it. (not necessarily a bad thing) - truth is - in general the quality you get depends upon the people that work in the wholesale lab. Some Labs are better than others. Some labs are very bad and you wonder how they survive.

15: As for Kodak Film getting better results at the Minilab - Bad Quality Control.. if you know how it is done you should know this... and who in their right mind would use polaroid/3m film - too much silver retention causes diffusion and bad effects for the machines that must analyze the negative. (Those printers are Giant Cameras and they must analyze the film before making the exposure on the paper).

And a special note just for BIOTIME.

You simply want your negs digitized and to be comparable with your prints is that what you are asking now..?

Ok here is the scoop for you - The Gretag Machines Overexpose - nope that is technical maintenance and quality control. BAD SHOPS BAD TECHNICAL PEOPLE. PERIOD.

The Frontiers better with Kodak and Agfa film - Quality Control - Film Balance - Period. If you knew what was involved you would understand this. (I know from what you write that you don't, and that is OK - you just want prints and scans to match - but now you have to know something...because you are now trying to compare apples and oranges etc..)

If you want a scan from your neg and want it to match - usually you get a JPEG a JPEG is not a true match of what was scanned - nor does it have to be the same resolution that was scanned. (It is considered a LOSSY format as well ) Get a TIF file if you want better. The resolution also plays a part is it 1024 x 768 pixels at 300 dpi or 150 dpi SIZE divided by DPI will give you the maximum number of inches at the stated DPI for example 1200 x 1800 Pixels at 300 DPi will give you a 4 x 6 print at 300 DPi - trying to make that an 8 x 12 will result in 150 dpi and so on. If you want the scans - what base do you want them 4 base 8 base 16 base ?? Do some research.. because what you are asking doesn't have a simple answer such as take them to Joes digital shop...

There is a whole lot more detail that could be added but we will stop here.