Request for comments on image quality

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

The lenses are immaculate (trust me on that ).

Wouldn't have thought the film being bad would have manifested itself like this, but I suppose you could be right.

Can anybody recommend a lab where they've had good results pelase? I'll send the next lot there - that will at least help me to eliminate the lab as the source of the problem.

Sorry we're digital here Normally send them online so can't recommend a film processor. Any camera specialist shops in your locality that you can go talk to?

[Roy MM]

What res did you have the camera set at rais?

[Raistlin]

Originally Posted by Paul

Sorry we're digital here Normally send them online so can't recommend a film processor. Any camera specialist shops in your locality that you can go talk to?

There's a Jessops in Cambridge and one in Peterborough, I suppose I could take the next roll of film to them.
__________________

Originally Posted by Roy MM

What res did you have the camera set at rais?

It's a film camera, so, ummm, "film" res

It was a 400 ISO film

[Roy MM]

aah my bad, i should read the thread more closely

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

There's a Jessops in Cambridge and one in Peterborough, I suppose I could take the next roll of film to them.

Mmmm jessops, there used to be a small camera shop outside Queensgate near MacD's I think, might want to ask there too just in case. If it's still there lol.

[Raistlin]

Originally Posted by Paul

Mmmm jessops, there used to be a small camera shop outside Queensgate near MacD's I think, might want to ask there too just in case. If it's still there lol.

I think they're both Jessops' now.

I'll take a look next time I'm up there though, thanks.

[Paul K]

Just looked and they have taken it over there is a Youngs Cameras in Wentworth street though. It's near Priestgate.

[Raistlin]

Originally Posted by Paul

Just looked and they have taken it over there is a Youngs Cameras in Wentworth street though. It's near Priestgate.

Thanks Paul, ar you trying to tell me something about Jessops?

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

Thanks Paul, ar you trying to tell me something about Jessops?

Not at all, just trying to give you options or a second opinion Can't seem to recall many specialist camera/ photo shops in Peterborough though

[tabatha]

Raistlin...How did you get the pics onto the forum??
Did you scan the negs..pics..or take from the cd??
The images on screen are 26"x24" at a res of 26 ppi.
I took the "goat" down to 6"x4" which gives a res of 318 ppi.
I havent tried to print but on screen there is nothing wrong with them
IMO..I assume you used a 35mm cam,which with a 400 iso film would
possibly show some grain....

What is baffling me is how you got a well focused[note the hairs] subject with a moving background????..

With regard to printing...I get all my fotos developed [not printed] and put onto cd...With a good scanner/printer I can do as I wish for the printing..either by scanning the negs or opening the cd in photoshop...

[Raistlin]

Originally Posted by tabatha

Raistlin...How did you get the pics onto the forum??
Did you scan the negs..pics..or take from the cd??

I took the pic from the CD as provided by Tesco and then uploaded then.

Originally Posted by tabatha

The images on screen are 26"x24" at a res of 26 ppi.
I took the "goat" down to 6"x4" which gives a res of 318 ppi.
I havent tried to print but on screen there is nothing wrong with them
IMO..I assume you used a 35mm cam,which with a 400 iso film would
possibly show some grain....

Which is what Angua said, I think I might need to try a lower ISO film next time to see if that improves matters.

Originally Posted by tabatha

What is baffling me is how you got a well focused[note the hairs] subject with a moving background????..

The background isn't moving, I just used a large aperature to get a really narrow depth of field. This leaves the object of the photo in sharp focus but blurs the background.

[Jules]

Well they look great on my comp

[iron25]

Originally Posted by whyme38

Well they look great on my comp

I agree, I don't know what everyone is going on about The animals themselves look pretty clear to me, it's just the background that it is out of focus and that is to be expected because that was not the main focus of the camera.

What exactly did you expect regarding the quality I'm not into cameras so don't know if the one you used was good or bad but the only thing I would suggest is to make a comparison with another camera or get the picture done elsewhere. I've only skimmed through this thread so if someone else suggested this than I agree with them too Have you had the pics developed so that you can compare with the actual photo?

[Raistlin]

Thanks for the nice comments guys (and gals ).

I'm not sure what I was expecting, the backgrounds are supposed to be blurred, I guess I just was expecting them to look softer.

I'm actually pretty pleased with the results overall though.

Originally Posted by Raistlin

Thanks for the nice comments guys (and gals ).

I'm not sure what I was expecting, the backgrounds are supposed to be blurred, I guess I just was expecting them to look softer.

I'm actually pretty pleased with the results overall though.

it looks like they scanned the negatives, then did a 'resize & resample' to get a standard print size, do they use Irfanview, lol

the pygmy goat & the meercat came out well, it is the backgrounds that have 'issues' for me at 1280*768 - hth ; Gaz