Color C-41 films - not sharp ?

[minoltist7]

I looked through my scans from color C-41 films, and neither one of them can reach the same level of sharpness as BW film (TMax 100 for example). Small details are not visible becouse of the grain and/or scanner color noise, even with ICE turned off.
Is it expected, or our labs probably develop it so bad, so graininess increased ? My scanner is Coolscan IV, and it seems OK (results from scanned Velvia 100F or Sensia 100 are quite sharp form my taste)

 

[Chris101]

Try Portra NC. I feel like it's B&W film in color.

 

[ampguy]

Try bracketing some exposures

Try bracketing some exposures

I have found that with many C41 color films, I have to add 2/3 or 1 stop to saturate and get sharpness out of the film. Here's an example from a few days ago with a Yashica GSN, and cheap Fuji Superia 400 (3 layer) film, with meter at ISO 320 (scroll down to plastic ducks entry) with Portra 400, I also add exposure, but it gives (by design I think) a very nice grain for portraits. Here's the Fuji 400 photo, develop and scan by Costco:

http://fpcf.blogspot.com/2008/06/film-photo-from-yashica-gsn.html

I looked through my scans from color C-41 films, and neither one of them can reach the same level of sharpness as BW film (TMax 100 for example). Small details are not visible becouse of the grain and/or scanner color noise, even with ICE turned off.
Is it expected, or our labs probably develop it so bad, so graininess increased ? My scanner is Coolscan IV, and it seems OK (results from scanned Velvia 100F or Sensia 100 are quite sharp form my taste)

 

[Gray Fox]

Ampguy:

That was pretty good for 400 film, but when you blow the image up it looks like the camera back focuses a bit if you were focusing on the ducks or the goose as the bark on the pine tree is tack sharp while they aren't.

 

[ampguy]

Thanks

Thanks

I noted that as well, and yes, I was focusing on the white duck. It's possible that the camera is backfocusing a tad, but since I can't recall the exact aperture, I need to do more tests at f1.7. I've got a roll of Reala 100 and hope to line up some things on the table with a tripod when I get a chance.

Ampguy:

That was pretty good for 400 film, but when you blow the image up it looks like the camera back focuses a bit if you were focusing on the ducks or the goose as the bark on the pine tree is tack sharp while they aren't.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

Try Portra NC. I feel like it's B&W film in color.

Here's another vote for Portra!.......'tho the little file size I have to use does'nt show much!
Dave.

 

[payasam]

I've had decent enough results from Fujicolor 100 over the last several years. However, I haven't had any prints made that were larger than 8" by 12".

 

[Warren T.]

I noted that as well, and yes, I was focusing on the white duck. It's possible that the camera is backfocusing a tad, but since I can't recall the exact aperture, I need to do more tests at f1.7. I've got a roll of Reala 100 and hope to line up some things on the table with a tripod when I get a chance.

sorry, this is a little OT from the original topic, but I also thought it was backfocusing when i first saw the picture and I was going to comment in it, but then I noticed that the stump on the left looked sharp even though it is slightly in front of the ducks. That's strange, or maybe it's just an optical illusion.

--Warren

 

[Robin P]

My Epson 4490 scanner makes life easy with colour neg but getting a good result from slide film is a challenge I don't often bother to try.
I find Fuji colour neg needs less work on colour balance than Portra but the Portra is sharp and has negligible grain.
Here's one done with Portra 160VC that's made a nice A4 print.

Cheers, Robin

 

[Thardy]

My Epson 4490 scanner makes life easy with colour neg but getting a good result from slide film is a challenge I don't often bother to try.
I find Fuji colour neg needs less work on colour balance than Portra but the Portra is sharp and has negligible grain.
Here's one done with Portra 160VC that's made a nice A4 print.

Cheers, Robin

Is that a scan of 35mm film using the 4490? Looks quite good if it is.

 

[Robin P]

Is that a scan of 35mm film using the 4490? Looks quite good if it is.

Yes, but shame on me I didn't use a rangefinder shot as an example - it was taken with a Hexanon 35mm f2.0 on an old Konica Autoreflex TC SLR.

Cheers, Robin

 

[ampguy]

Hi Warren

Hi Warren

Here is another perspective of the stump, but it is even more of an optical illusion.

Looking straight down on the objects from the front, the stump or bear sculpture was actually the same distance from the lens. Basically the eyes of the bear were the same distance from film as the eyes on the white duck, which I focused on, and may be in focus, but little detail.

I'm gonig to post my focus results in the Yashica section, but basically, there is some back focus at f1.7, but good focus accuracy at f2 and scale focusing.

I guess there is focus shift, and I'm curious if others have the same experience with their GSNs?

sorry, this is a little OT from the original topic, but I also thought it was backfocusing when i first saw the picture and I was going to comment in it, but then I noticed that the stump on the left looked sharp even though it is slightly in front of the ducks. That's strange, or maybe it's just an optical illusion.

--Warren