Well. The lab destroyed my film. They put a sorry-letter (stating that they accidentally destroyed my film) into the envelope and a cheap new Kodak Gold film roll.
Time to find a new lab!
1 Like
The hardest part of developing film these days is sourcing the supplies never mind, went to look , C-41 two-bath kits seem to be widely available, at least in the US. That, a tank, and a loading bag (or a very dark room to load the tankâs reel with the film), and youâre processing film.
Hereâs a chemical kit that seems dirt-simple to use:
2 Likes
Ok. Meanwhile I got 2 films back, a Portra400 and an Ultramax400. I had a closer look at Portra. I think at least one stop of underexposure can be recovered quite well with Portra400, digitally.
Why not just meter well and try to expose correctly?
Because I am too lazy to carry a tripod with me all the time?
I donât follow what does a tripod have to do with metering your scene?
There used to be a shop, at the central train station, that would develop a film with an index print, on site, in a few hours. Not that long ago, 2009.
Well, even with an ISO 400 film, I find myself sometimes in the situation the situation that the film is not sensitive enough if I donât want to create motion blur. E.g. if a forest is very dense. Overexposure is easier to control, especially with an ND filter. Consequently, I need to underexpose slightly if I donât want to create motion blur.
My granddaughter told me not long ago, âanything earlier than 2009 is the olden days.â GeeshâŚ
1 Like
In our world its almost⌠âLast week is like soâŚyesterdayââŚ
1 Like
@betazoid I am sure you have a reason behind your question, but to me the best way to find out is to go and try it yourself. Analog is as much the effect as it is the process.
Regarding blurring, would you happen to have examples? Could you also tell us how you captured them?