 James A. Fergason |
New to Photography, Grainy Pictures
I have a Canon EOS Rebel XS (Not Digital) Second, I have shot my first roll of Fuji film, (400, cheap film, $2 roll 12exp.)
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
David A. Bliss |
James, I would say it was the film. Try getting better film, having if developed at a professional lab, and see if your results are better. The first thing you want to do is eliminate the possibility of bad film from the equation. I am guessing this was print (color negative) and not slide (color positive). I didn't shoot much print film, but try one of these. Fuji Reala - ISO 100 You should see a big difference. Hope this helps!
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Hi James, The Fuji film you were sold, ISO 400, is an “OK” film. You can have satisfactory enlargements made up to 8x10 inch without the grain structure becoming too evident. That being said, let’s explore why you are seeing grain and thus disappointed. 1. Underexposure promotes an enlarged grain structure. A few key questions: How are you viewing the finished images? What size are the prints you are examining? If not prints, are you viewing digitized images on a computer screen? If digitized, suspect digitalizing methods. Likely, this film, if properly exposed and processed, will exceed most digital experiences. Alan Marcus
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
James A. Fergason |
Im sorry guys, Turned out it was problem that was actually associated with what was behind the camera. (i.e.--- ME!) I hadn't had the film printed, only negatives developed and digital scans made to CD. Turns out that Wolf Cameras makes the default resolution so high, that all the grain showed up on the screen. Once I shrunk down the size, it was fine. And to verify this, I went in and had a few select prints made at the regular 4x6 size. The prints are perfect. Sorry about the bad post, but it's great to know that you guys are there to help a noob like me. Just to be safe, though, What films and speeds can you suggest that I should be getting? Not too much action shots, mainly landscapes, fountains, still shots. Day and night. Thanks again guys. James
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Film speed is proportional to the grain structure. Slow films have super fine grain and high acuity. It is my suggestion that 200 ISO is a good all-around film. Choose slower if you know in advance that you will be making giant over-mantel prints. Keep in mind that advances in film technology are now an everyday occurrence. Today’s 400 ISO materials perform better than yesterdays 100 film. That being said, I am convinced that soon film will be too expensive to make and market. Thus I am advising you to make the switch to digital. Best regards, Alan Marcus
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Raquel S. |
Hi James! Keep having FUN and practicing with your film camera. Experiment with different films for different situations. Just keep shooting, logging your techniques, and scouring your results. My two cents: Try starting with 100 speed films that David B. suggested. If you don't have one already, buy yourself a decent tripod and use it, especially in low light situations. You'll be happy you did. Keep posting your pics and let us know how it goes. Happy shooting.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Dara Choy |
Hello, I am new to posting. I found this thread because I am having the same problem. I have had my EOS Rebel XS for 10 years now. In the past, I have always used 100 ISO film with beautiful results. Unfortunately, it appears 100 film is being phased out, as I can not seem to find it any more. When I use 200 or more, the pictures get quite grainy. I don't digitalize them, I just get the printed photos straight from the film. My pictures have been grainy for a full year now because of this. My camera seems to to be reading the bar code properly as it correctly puts in the correct ISO number. Does my camera need to be overhauled or do I have to change a setting? I love my EOS and I am not ready to switch to digital. -Dara
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Hi Dara, The problem you describe is not attributable to your camera or the film you have selected. While its true, 100 ISO yields a finer grain structure than 200 ISO, nevertheless, film speed as it relates to production a 4x6 inch prints is mute. Stated another way, whatever brand or ISO you choose, a quite satisfactory print will result as long as you are rquesting 8x10 inch prints or smaller. So what’s the problem? Film processing error? Could be, a failure to maintain temperature control over the chemical baths could be responsible. This is not likely as one-hour shop’s have failsafe controls that prevent this error. Same is true for exhausted or contaminated solutions. It’s not likely that any shop would continue to demonstrate poor processing conditions. Could be consistent under-exposure from the EOS Rebel XS but this too seems unlikely. Most likely the problem lies with the one-hour shop’s printer/processor/scanner. Many older one-hour shop printers rely on pure optical methods to make prints from negatives. This method is tried and true; the negative images are projected onto sensitized paper and chemically developed. Grain is seldom visible on prints of 8x10 sizes or less. More modern printers use a digital print engine that exposes sensitized papers by means of laser or light valve technology. These printers are top-drawer when printing images from digital files but they can turn out sub-standard work when film is the media. This is true because film is not digital, it must be scanned and converted to a digital file. To yield a quality digital file the scanning resolution must be set quite high. This can slow the printing process. Often one-hour labs have the scanner resolution set quite low to gain throughput. You need to test your film and camera combination by having the film printed at a lab utilizing an old fashioned optical printer. Otherwise ask your lab to scan at the higher resolution. Keep in mind the lab personnel may not have the skills to change their printer or the printer might not have the ability to scan and print at high resolution. Maybe your only remedy will be to select a different lab with better capabilities. Alan Marcus (marginal technical gobbledygook)
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Dara Choy |
Thank you very much for your detailed response. I took my last three undeveloped rolls to a different lab on the weekend and they turned out beautifully. I am also relieved to know that it is most likely the printing process and that my negatives from the last year should be unaffected. I plan to get my favorites all reprinted. Now that I don't have to repair my camera, I think I am going to look into taking some photography classes! Thank you very much for your time and expertise!
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Dara Choy |
Thank you very much for your detailed response. I took my last three undeveloped rolls to a different lab on the weekend and they turned out beautifully. I am also relieved to know that it is most likely the printing process and that my negatives from the last year should be unaffected. I plan to get my favorites all reprinted. Now that I don't have to repair my camera, I think I am going to look into taking some photography classes! Thank you very much for your time and expertise!
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||||||||||||||
