I found the Kodak 400VC almost unusable. It's just way too grainy. The shop which did the develop and scan did a terrible job I think. Granted the 400VC is grainy to begin with and I think it did sharpening when scan so the scans and the prints came out terrible. I think the print is actually from the scan though I am not sure. But it just doesn't look good at all.
I fired up my Epson V500 and I think the scan comes out a tad better, my standard. At least the grain is not so offensive that I almost puke. If I ever shoot another roll of 400VC I guess I would shoot it at ASA320.
Scanning is a pain. Just don't try it at home if you don't absolutely have to.
Man, the photos are too dark.
ReplyDeleteThey kind of suck, aren't they? I have to admit the film is of unknown expiration date and unknown origin. I got them with my Canon F-1 some time ago. I got no luck with 400VC. I shot it as rated at ASA400. I probably still have one or two rolls around. I actually bought some 160VC, hopefully they will behave like I like them to behave.
ReplyDeleteI am waiting for the D90 replacement now. Pathetic, eh?
I went to flickr, Gee, other people's 400VC looks much better, the color is crisper and all. Mine is muddy and grainy. I guess it could very well be the developing temperature, too hot? I don't know. It's messed up.
ReplyDeleteI just checked some of my 400NC, the color is crisp too. I shot it with a Canon P. They came out fine. So I don't know.
ReplyDeleteHoly crap. Now I think it's my Nikon F5. It might have some metering problem. I guess just to let Nikon or any authorized service check it will cost hundreds. Or I just compensate with exp compensation +1 stop will fix it.
ReplyDelete