A few shots from my first roll of film from London...

[Amp34]

Grain is as a result of 2 things.

1 - ISO

Being ISO 200, there shouldn't much grain.

2 - pushing the negative/film

This will add grain too, and both of these happens to digital files as well.

(thought you said "the film and development I'm confident in." ?)

3. Pushing the actual scan.

I'm guessing number 3. OP look at the negatives and see if you have underexposed the shot (very light coloured negatives with few dark areas). They were probably very dark scans and then brightened by the scanning software giving lots of digital noise to get any detail out of them.

As for scanning they are all rubbish... Unless you spend a lot of money (like £20 a roll) even good companies like peak imaging just provide 1500px 1MB jpegs which seem to be almost impossible to remove any colour cast from as they have lost most of the data a tiff would have had. One way is to scan yourself although of the photosoc/uni don't have the equipment then you either need to buy a good scanner or use a macro lens and light box. Both aren't cheap... Film is just expensive, cheap up front costs but expensive to "run", whereas digital is expensive up front but basically free to "run".

 

[wire-screw]

3. Pushing the actual scan.

I'm guessing number 3. OP look at the negatives and see if you have underexposed the shot (very light coloured negatives with few dark areas). They were probably very dark scans and then brightened by the scanning software giving lots of digital noise to get any detail out of them.

As for scanning they are all rubbish... Unless you spend a lot of money (like £20 a roll) even good companies like peak imaging just provide 1500px 1MB jpegs which seem to be almost impossible to remove any colour cast from as they have lost most of the data a tiff would have had. One way is to scan yourself although of the photosoc/uni don't have the equipment then you either need to buy a good scanner or use a macro lens and light box. Both aren't cheap... Film is just expensive, cheap up front costs but expensive to "run", whereas digital is expensive up front but basically free to "run".

It seems this might be the case. All the ones that turned out okay were generally dark the rubbish ones were very light. I guess more compensation was needed on the lighter ones.

 

[wire-screw]

By the way guys I appreciate the criticism and feedback this was more of a big learning experience than serious shots.

 

[wire-screw]

Raymond what HiFi did you get in the end?

 

[Raymond Lin]

I don't think it was me who was looking to upgrade.

I already have a 5.1 system and a stereo system for the bedroom.

 

[wire-screw]

I don't think it was me who was looking to upgrade.

I already have a 5.1 system and a stereo system for the bedroom.

AVi HiFi ring a bell? Passives are rubbish?

 

[Raymond Lin]

I remember who you are and your background, it just I do not wish to go into the debate about HiFi right now. Besides, I am happy with what I have and don't want to spend any money on it for quite a while.

 

[wire-screw]

I remember who you are and your background, it just I do not wish to go into the debate about HiFi right now. Besides, I am happy with what I have and don't want to spend any money on it for quite a while.

Your a weird mofo Raymond! Thanks for the photography help tho.
.

 

[At The Gates]

It's not like Digital, even ISO 200 film is grainy, depending on what you got. Superia 200 or something?

Also chronicly underexposed shots will always be grainer. Plus as already mentioned the minilab scanner will have boosted the gamma to compensate which only exacerbates the problem.

If you want to shoot colour film at high speed you can:

1. Try and find Superia 1600 although it's expensive (£8-10 a roll)
2. Shoot Porta 400 at 800 or 1600 and get the lab to push
3. Shoot Portra 800 (again very expensive) at 1600 and develop normally.

B&W you can try Delta 3200 but i don't like it in 35mm, very unpleasant grain (lovely in 120 developed in XTOL though). I would use a decent lab though as Delta 3200 needs a push developer like XTOL or DDX which i doubt Jessops would do for you. You can also shoot something like TMAX 400 at 800 and get the lab to push it.

The scratches on your negatives are either the rollers in the lab machine, or the tension rollers in the camera. You can test by seeing if the lines on the negative line up with the metal rollers in the camera.

 

[wire-screw]

It's not like Digital, even ISO 200 film is grainy, depending on what you got. Superia 200 or something?

Also chronicly underexposed shots will always be grainer. Plus as already mentioned the minilab scanner will have boosted the gamma to compensate which only exacerbates the problem.

If you want to shoot colour film at high speed you can:

1. Try and find Superia 1600 although it's expensive (£8-10 a roll)
2. Shoot Porta 400 at 800 or 1600 and get the lab to push
3. Shoot Portra 800 (again very expensive) at 1600 and develop normally.

B&W you can try Delta 3200 but i don't like it in 35mm, very unpleasant grain (lovely in 120 developed in XTOL though). I would use a decent lab though as Delta 3200 needs a push developer like XTOL or DDX which i doubt Jessops would do for you. You can also shoot something like TMAX 400 at 800 and get the lab to push it.

The scratches on your negatives are either the rollers in the lab machine, or the tension rollers in the camera. You can test by seeing if the lines on the negative line up with the metal rollers in the camera.

That's great thanks. It seems my next lot should be a bit better then as I'm now shooting HP5 Plus 400 and I'm only taking brightish day shots so I can keep shutter fast to minimize blur and obtain good exposure!

 

[At The Gates]

Depending on how you shoot, you might need some slower film as the leaf shutter on the 35RC only goes up to 1/500 if i remember rightly. It's a great camera though. Amazed you found a working one for 25 quid!

TMAX-100 is a very good fine grain low speed film. My favourite is Acros 100 which is amazingly sharp if developed and exposed well.

You can also try Fuji Neopan 400 before they discontinue it. I love that film, great contrast and very forgiving exposure latitude. That's my 'street' film. Can push it to 1600 too. Cheaper than HP5+ as well. In fact i think Ilford films are more expensive than all Fuji/Kodak B&W films.