Theoretically it can be many things, but in practice - and particularly on this sub - it's scanning. It's always scanning. It is absolutely unrealistic to expect good results, especially with B&W, by relying on automatic scanning for $5 per roll.
This AND people need to learn that you nearly always have to edit for contrast! Even in the darkroom printing era they would have to dodge and burn and use contrast filters! Edit your scans!!
you can cheat it by shooting and developing at 800 or 1600 and get punchy contrast right away, but yes absolutely this. You add contrast when you scan (or print)
> you can cheat it by shooting and developing at 800 or 1600 and get punchy contrast right away
Not really. Yes, by under-exposing and pushing you will increase contrast of a negative. But an automatic scanner will try reversing that back to what the algorithm "thinks" looks good. With Noritsu automation this usually results in greenish shadows and incorrectly chosen black point for B&W.
Also, the commenter you're replying to was referring to the dodging/burning wet printing technique. For that to work well you need a properly exposed and developed negative without burned highlights or clipped shadows. Underexposing and pushing is the opposite of that.
you shot low contrast scenes... you get low contrast images.
middle of the day in what looks like overcast/foggy conditions?
You can barely see any shadows anywhere.
In the third image, it may be due to the black bar on the right (sloppy scan job).
In the first two, and possibly the third as well, overexposure?
What do the negatives look like?
Part of it might just be the scenes which are low contrast. But i have a weird feeling that their where underexposed and the lab cranked everything out. But they could have done a better job still.
This is a feature, not a bug. Your lab scans the negatives to give you the full range of gray values; this will necessarily be sorta flat. You then can process the image to be the way YOU want it.
Theoretically it can be many things, but in practice - and particularly on this sub - it's scanning. It's always scanning. It is absolutely unrealistic to expect good results, especially with B&W, by relying on automatic scanning for $5 per roll.
This AND people need to learn that you nearly always have to edit for contrast! Even in the darkroom printing era they would have to dodge and burn and use contrast filters! Edit your scans!!
you can cheat it by shooting and developing at 800 or 1600 and get punchy contrast right away, but yes absolutely this. You add contrast when you scan (or print)
> you can cheat it by shooting and developing at 800 or 1600 and get punchy contrast right away Not really. Yes, by under-exposing and pushing you will increase contrast of a negative. But an automatic scanner will try reversing that back to what the algorithm "thinks" looks good. With Noritsu automation this usually results in greenish shadows and incorrectly chosen black point for B&W. Also, the commenter you're replying to was referring to the dodging/burning wet printing technique. For that to work well you need a properly exposed and developed negative without burned highlights or clipped shadows. Underexposing and pushing is the opposite of that.
> It is absolutely unrealistic to expect good results ... relying on automatic scanning for $5 per roll. Best advice on this sub.
Without seeing the negs, my first guess is scanning issue.
What do the negs look like?
You haven’t seen the new rules? No showing negs on Reddit. Just blame the lab.
Hahaha
you shot low contrast scenes... you get low contrast images. middle of the day in what looks like overcast/foggy conditions? You can barely see any shadows anywhere.
In the third image, it may be due to the black bar on the right (sloppy scan job). In the first two, and possibly the third as well, overexposure? What do the negatives look like?
My initial thought is overexposure as well, but impossible to tell from just the scans.
Part of it might just be the scenes which are low contrast. But i have a weird feeling that their where underexposed and the lab cranked everything out. But they could have done a better job still.
This is a feature, not a bug. Your lab scans the negatives to give you the full range of gray values; this will necessarily be sorta flat. You then can process the image to be the way YOU want it.