Recipe When You Send Films for Processing at a Lab

wibbly

wibbly

Messages
4,979
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
Interested in your recipe when you send films for processing at a lab…. Faced with choices such as small, medium or large scans and whether to go with Noritsu or Fuji Frontier scans along with other notes such as whether to add sharpening or not, I get a bit confused and in fairness simply go for medium scans with no other instructions.

What should I be asking for or is this as good as I need?
 
As I normally scan my own when I get them when ordering from Filmdev I go for small scans. Used to go for medium tiffs / no sharpening but don't see the point anymore.
 
I had a few cases where ildev over-sharpened, so I ask for no sharpening now. I always get medium scans for C41, as that gives me a bit of cropping flexibility, and I hate (loathe, detest) scanning C41 myself. I might get small scans for black and white (if I didn't dev it myself) as I'm prepared to scan keepers... but more likely to throw in the extra quid or two and go for medium.

I also ask them to split into folders, one per film, and to return the negatives in a soft envelope, cut in strips of 6. I've no idea whether this is still necessary, but I didn't like the large hard envelope they used to use, which wouldn't go through my letterbox and meant a number of trips to the RM undelivered office. There's also still something there about JPEGs only (after my investigation of whether 8-bit TIFFs added anything, reported here earlier... TLDR, for me, they didn't, and slowed up downloading considerably). I've been happy with the Noritsu, so don't mention it.
 
ChrisR said:
I had a few cases where ildev over-sharpened, so I ask for no sharpening now. I always get medium scans for C41, as that gives me a bit of cropping flexibility, and I hate (loathe, detest) scanning C41 myself. I might get small scans for black and white (if I didn't dev it myself) as I'm prepared to scan keepers... but more likely to throw in the extra quid or two and go for medium.

I also ask them to split into folders, one per film, and to return the negatives in a soft envelope, cut in strips of 6. I've no idea whether this is still necessary, but I didn't like the large hard envelope they used to use, which wouldn't go through my letterbox and meant a number of trips to the RM undelivered office. There's also still something there about JPEGs only (after my investigation of whether 8-bit TIFFs added anything, reported here earlier... TLDR, for me, they didn't, and slowed up downloading considerably). I've been happy with the Noritsu, so don't mention it.
Click to expand...

Well if you select the Fuji frontier you get the same as Asda i.e. 1818 X1228 and is very usable (well for me for years) as if just posting here and seen on a monitor the results are very good e.g. this is a crop https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/post-a-related-film-photo.661970/page-13 #492 also I have shown, that you can just scrape thru' with a A4 print on many subjects (no cropping) and result shown below in pic...and I dislike home scanning but if I have a winner it's not too much trouble to scan a few negs.

Scan of a A4 home print I sent to Miles showing the faults in my lens
iadOBeh.jpg
 
FilmDev need to update their scan sample page, which doesn't seem to link to any images at the moment - I'd like to see Noritsu samples at the various resolutions. When they had the Fuji samples up, then for my money the medium was good enough for most purposes, the large (which I went for) added some extra detail that would be useful in crops and big enlargements, but the extra large wasn't getting much more out of the negative, since the film grain seemed to be limiting. With the Noritsu, in the absence of samples, I'd again go for the large (which from a previous post here is apparently bigger than the Fuji extra large).
 
Working with a lab for me is a huge part of the process. You should lease with them quite a bit initially to get the scans where you want them to be. I believe @skyshark still uses the same lab I do and has gone through the same process.

I’m currently contemplating adjusting some of my scan settings for a slightly different look to some of the stuff I’m shooting, but I’ve been very happy with how my scans have been coming back recently, with little in the way of PP needed afterwards.
 
Don’t really get scans done at a lab anymore but if I did I’d request for unsharpened, flat (no curves/levels applied) TIFFs at 2000 dpi for 6x6 and 2500dpi for 35mm so the files end up around 3500~4000px on the long side.
 
Thanks for all the comments. I’ll keep on doing what I’m doing then - which is basically getting the scans back with no other options added.

skysh4rk said:
You should be asking for whatever suits you and what you want from your photographs. What is it that you want from your photographs?
Click to expand...

I was simply asking as having used Filmdev a couple of times and not being vastly experienced with film I wasn’t sure if there was a formulaic set up to get the best from scans. (y)
 
wibbly said:
Thanks for all the comments. I’ll keep on doing what I’m doing then - which is basically getting the scans back with no other options added.



I was simply asking as having used Filmdev a couple of times and not being vastly experienced with film I wasn’t sure if there was a formulaic set up to get the best from scans. (y)
Click to expand...

It's not really about best scans though (what even is best?), it's about most suitable scans. Scans should be tailored to suit you and what you want from your photography (e.g., brightness, contrast, size, etc.). For instance, why pay for a large scan if you are not going to print or going to print small. Conversely, why would you get a medium scan if you were going to get large prints? I select scan size based on the print size I have in mind.

I also might ask my lab to scan certain frames in a different way depending on the look that I'm trying to achieve. For example, in the photograph below, I actually asked the lab (UKFL, now CFL) to scan it twice, once with exposure adjusted for the brighter parts of the image (i.e., the town) and once with exposure optimised for the details in the sky, so I could combine these into a single image later (I didn't end up doing that in the end... the image below is just the image optimised for the town...).

At any rate, I wouldn't just do what everyone else does, do what you need to do, be flexible if you need to be, and don't be afraid to experiment.

Have fun.

 
Last edited:
skysh4rk said:
Scans should be tailored to suit you and what you want from your photography (e.g., brightness, contrast, size, etc.). For instance, why pay for a large scan if you are not going to print or going to print small. Conversely, why would you get a medium scan if you were going to get large prints? I select scan size based on the print size I have in mind.
Click to expand...

There's also nothing to stop you getting the neg scanned again if you want to print large (or heck, get a traditional print made).
Re Brightness, contrast etc - I tend to do that in processing. I've been quite impressed with what you can do with a medium jpg scan from a good lab.

A 'medium' neutral scan (the default option) tends to give me a good base to go from should I want to do something with the shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top