robert himmelright

the most common cause of that is people comming in with images in aRGB instead of sRGB. Double check that.

walmart uses luster surface. Probably FCA type II as thats what most labs use.

the first number looks like a sort number (what lab operators use to keep track of which order is which) the 2nd I think means its the 77th print in the order, the NNNN means they did not adjust cyan, magenta, yellow or density(in that particular order), no idea about the last part as I run frontiers, not noritsu's.

www.ezprints.com.....walmart uses fuji matte too.

sprint is IIRC essentially a clone of kodak d-76 ID-11 for you ilford people. A decent all around developer. Rodinol I don't know much about, but diafine might be your best bet, read up on it, its a 2 bath developer and EVERY film is 3min in part A then 3 min in part b.

c-41 as a proscess is c-41. A pro lab may or may not have machines which work by dunking your film instead of using a leader card and belts to minimize scratches. The difference is in the printing, not just the machine but the tech who runs the machine.

Forrest, I think you're very confused about something a dlab scans at 300dpi PER OUTPUT SIZE ie 4x6 at approx 1800dpi 8x12 at 2400dpi.

small prints, I like optical better as I look at proofs with a loup to see which one is the truely sharp one and which one's aren't for potential enlargements. Large prints, digital....definitly I dont have a set up to make prints, but I do have a film scanner, and when I print from my scanned negs I've been satisfied wiht sharpness/color and density where as what has come back to me from both fuji and qualex after having been optically enlarged is dissapointing.

I still recomend filtering, though it can be done, changing the filtration durring the printing stage to compensate can yield grainy photos, muted colors and will never be quite as good as proper filtration would have made it.

any of the pro films from kodak or fuji. Read their datasheets for filters.

on my scanner all be it a nikon theres the option for the preview image to be "neutral" or "proscessed" maybe that has something to do wiht it?

if you're just using them essentially to get negs, proscesing a roll of film negs only at a drug store is around the same price, The drug store I worked at was $2 for 24 exposures and an index print. Ready in about 11 minutes.

read john's response carefully. It scans at 300dpi PER print size. a 4x6 is scanned at 1200dpi, an 8x10 or 8x12 from 35mm is scanned at 2400dpi. Frontiers that can do 10x15's scan at 3000dpi for a 10x15 print.

they should be able to figure out what you want if you tell them darker/lighter, more/less contrast ECT. Remeber, frontiers are nice but they arent miracle machines.

1) she probably has a d-carrier, google search the webpage. Its basically an lcd screen the size of a 35mm neg, the proscesor works the same way, but the d-carrier simulates a neg.

2) speed, products and reliability. The SFA series has been discontinued for over 10 years now, also most SFA's max out at a 6 inch wide paper, so 8x10's aren't viable.

 

The index printer on SFA's is also a low rez unit like your noritsu.

Gary,

maybe not nescisarily a pro lab if cost is an issue, but the rest of your post, I couldn't agree more.

first off whats wrong with the print? Assuming they have some sort of color cast the answer is simple. Once on the printing screen, they can simply change the output mode to b/w. P.s costco doesnt use frontiers they use noritsu equipment.....proscess should be similar though.

im a big fan of going locally for what's availible. When i worked at a chain i did up to 8x12 there, now that I live in a different area I go to my local independant lab for anything up to 8x12 and send out to mpix for large prints.

looks like the lab's scanner thought your neg was underexposed cause your dog is black....and the tech didn't catch it. were the other negs scanned well?

in an optical minilab environment it was harder to get neutral b/w on color paper especially with xp2......but in the modern digital minilab i distinctly remember only have to change the output mode from color to b/w.....three mouseclicks.

if the film was proscessed in c-41 the bleach step would have entirely removed the image, not left a grainy underexposed looking one. You posted pictures, but is the film fogged?

basically at labs I've worked at, advantix film is put into a "detacher" which removes the film from its cartridge and puts it into an intermediate cartridge to be proscessed, the pointy end with three holes is forward with the three holes being hooked to a leader card. Sometimes the film jams for whatever reason in the detacher, so its into a dark bag to pry the advantix cartridge open by hand and get the film out. Usually the lab has a stock of replacement casettes to put the film back in, but obviously your mom's lab didn't. They're availible through fuji, and I'd assume kodak too.

a color coupler print made on a color negative paper?

It really depends what you want. Supra will have a little more contrast and snap, portra will be somewhat flatter. If you're enlarging yourself buy the smallest pack of each and see waht you like.

With working on frontiers for several years, I never saw any orange speckling. Sharpening artifacts sometimes, but never just orange speckling. Setting the sharpness to "low 2" may help on the frontier, but realistically I wouldn't trust walgreens for anything after being fired for dumping and remixing fixer after two control strips indicated that as the best course of action.

It almost sounds as if walgreen's frontier's scanner was having some sort of an issue from your description.