color of hair
Don
daughter using the P mode and the Pic mode with and with out flash with
a good amount of light coming in from the window. The pictures came out
very good ( at least to me) but her hair was more to the redish side
instead of her dirty blonde color. She does have red highlights in her
hair but they are not always visible, and I did not notice them while
taking the pictures.
I used fuji film 400 speed, built in flash, between 100 and 135 mm using
Tamaron 100-300mm lense with a black background and she was wearing a
white blouse. As I said they all came out good to me with the exception
of the hair color. Althiugh I do like the new color of the hair!! Is
this normal or could I have done something else to get a more correct
hair color.
Thanks
Don
digital
big of a deal........
on the first frame of the next roll of film shoot a gray card (an 18% gray
card) this will give the lab (pro or amatuer) something that they can take a
reading from and make a nuetral exposure from................
ask yourself this how in the hell do you think the lab would know what color
your daughters hair was?
eric
pat jerina
From what I can tell without looking at it, (here we go with photography
via osmosis once again...) There is a chance that the color balance
could be towards the magenta or red side. Beyond that, I could not tell
you with out seeing the image for myself.
-- pat jerina photography
dallas, tx
972.320.5143 voicemail / pager
214.696.1759 fax
http://www.flash.net/~pjerina
Alan
Ive always suggested that labs not only use CMYK and RGB but should add
CLAROIL to their print wheels.
{{:>]}
Alan
Don wrote in message <36E332F1...@mdc.net>...
Bernard
> Hi I am a newbie and have a Canon Elan II, I took some pictures of my
> daughter
And you're sure you're not a child molester? Most of that shit happens
within the family, you know.... And taking pictures is very suspect
anyway.
Bernard
D.Grabowski
>Hi I am a newbie and have a Canon Elan II, I took some pictures of my
>daughter using the P mode and the Pic mode with and with out flash with
>a good amount of light coming in from the window. The pictures came out
>very good ( at least to me) but her hair was more to the redish side
>instead of her dirty blonde color. She does have red highlights in her
>hair but they are not always visible, and I did not notice them while
>taking the pictures.
>
>I used fuji film 400 speed, built in flash, between 100 and 135 mm using
>Tamaron 100-300mm lense with a black background and she was wearing a
>white blouse. As I said they all came out good to me with the exception
>of the hair color. Althiugh I do like the new color of the hair!! Is
>this normal or could I have done something else to get a more correct
>hair color.
>
>Thanks
>
>Don
Don,
The other guys are right in so much as the lab may have color
corrected wrong. Welcome to the world of portraits and ultimate lab
selection. Before totally condemning the lab though consider a couple
of things you might have done to confuse the issue. The day light
streaming in , was it very late afternoon or setting sun? Around here
the sun sets very red. Did you have incandecent interior lights on?
They give a very warm cast that color daylight film reacts to
especially if shot near or around paneling. The room itself can lend
off casts into your picture as well. Most of this is correctable at
the time of the shoot or at the time of processing to a great degree.
Your general everyday consumer lab is unlikely to bother beyond a
certain point IMO.
One last note FWIW , my experience is that several of the Fuji films
have an extra sensitivity to picking up reds in a portrait, couple
that with the rest of the possibilities and you get red hair when red
highlights are present. This is offered as food for thought for the
next time.
Post back if your problem continues .
Regards,
David Grabowski
Don
something here but your comment ( how in the hell do you think the lab would
know what color your daughters hair was?) I would assume they would know that as
they know what the color of her clothes were as well as the background color
was. Besides I have taken her picture before and the hair color was correct..
digital wrote:
> you screwed up.............here is how to correct it if it is really that
> big of a deal........
>
> on the first frame of the next roll of film shoot a gray card (an 18% gray
> card) this will give the lab (pro or amatuer) something that they can take a
> reading from and make a nuetral exposure from................
>
> ask yourself this how in the hell do you think the lab would know what color
> your daughters hair was?
>
> eric
>
digital
Don wrote:
> Well Eric I thank you for your response as I knew you would, but maybe I missed
> something here but your comment ( how in the hell do you think the lab would
> know what color your daughters hair was?) I would assume they would know that as
> they know what the color of her clothes
how? there is no standard on clothes for photography........white has many different
shades, pale white, cream white, bright white, super bright white, off white,
almonds white, etc. get it.......
besides depending on the dyes in the clothes you will also get
flourescing...............this can affect the color of clothes............
> were as well as the background color
> was.
oh yea we have a standard in the photography business for background
colors..............wrong..............
the only way that your lab can give you accurate results is for you to give them a
standard.............and the standard is either a 18% gray card or a mcbeth color
checker........
> Besides I have taken her picture before and the hair color was correct..
it was correct or you liked it better........either way it was just luck if you did
not give them a neutral..........
eric
Steve1chsn
>within the family, you know.... And taking pictures is very suspect
>anyway.
You beat me to it bernard, i was thinking the same thing....
**** steve ****
Ruben Sanchez
> > > Hi I am a newbie and have a Canon Elan II, I took some pictures of my
> > > daughter using the P mode and the Pic mode with and with out flash with
> > > a good amount of light coming in from the window. The pictures came out
> > > very good ( at least to me) but her hair was more to the redish side
> > > instead of her dirty blonde color. She does have red highlights in her
> > > hair but they are not always visible, and I did not notice them while
> > > taking the pictures.
Don,
First of all, using an 18% gray card with print film, won't guarantee
that a pro lab will produce the correct hair color. You can take that
same negative to 10 different pro labs, and you'll get 10 different
prints with 10 different hair colors. The main reason for this, is that
not all print machines are calibrated to the same standard, and you have
different print machines manufactured by different companies. You also
have different labs using different printing papers. Some use Kodak
paper, others use Fuji, and others use Agfa paper. Each if these
printing papers responds differently and using the same negative, you
will get 3 differing prints.
The best way to get the hair color that you are familiar with, is to
shoot a transparency. Then tell the lab to make a print to match the
transparency as close as possible. They will not be able to match it
100%, as transparency film has a greater color range than printing
paper, but at least it will give the pro lab an idea of what your
talking about.
One other thing, as you had daylight falling on the hair, you need to
know that daylight has a different color temperature throughout the
day. As the day approaches sunset, you will see that the spectrum is
shifted towards the red and this in turn will shift all the colors
around you towards the lower spectrum (red). Keep this in mind when
your using syncro-sunlight.
Good Luck,
R Sanchez
Alan
newbie in the way a pro would address it and maybe he's not that committed.
I would believe he's using an fast finisher and not a real pro lab. I could
be wrong but read the post.
>First of all, using an 18% gray card with print film, won't guarantee
>that a pro lab will produce the correct hair color. You can take that
>same negative to 10 different pro labs, and you'll get 10 different
>prints with 10 different hair colors.
First it starts with the negatives, these one hour labs are set for higher
temperatures and faster development times. Next the type of C-41 processor,
roller or dip and dunk. We converted everything to dip and dunk with burst
agitation to get better consistency and to avoid scratches which we have
almost totally eliminated. And we do dip and dunk E-6 with a special water
rinse provision for the cleanest slides you ever seen. Up to 8x10... We do
a lot of E-6 from NY .
Actually a Macbeth helps us more. Ten good labs would vary slightly, but
the variance should be because of the operators read and or override of the
machine and since exposure changes density it can also enhance a problem.
When you pay me to color correct on an individual basis we just became
partners. Its called custom work. One or two test prints is Ok for our
clientele and we usually don't charge but when we stop the whole lab just
for you, take out the checkbook. If you knew how many pros we have to
correct for and repair their 'PRO" work, you would laugh,,,,its
pathetic..the biggest problem is they never see florescent lighting
resulting in green hair highlights (they shoot with Metz's, potato mashers)
and overblown whited out faces.
The main reason for this, is that
>not all print machines are calibrated to the same standard, and you have
>different print machines manufactured by different companies.
Not quite right, our lab like most pro labs calibrate every morning to a
standard of the photofininshing industry, We then chemically and print test
the 5,8,16 and 40in processors to the same standard, Electronics does a
lot of the work for us today. If you got a lazy lab tech who works by the
hour and doesn't care you get variance because of usage cross-contamination,
evaporation, your water supply, filtration levels, etc. That's why you
check daily or every two days to see your changes and then you correct and
check again. Processing is a business of variables, but it still time and
temp and replenishment and cleanliness. Being on target eliminates one of
the variables.
You also
>have different labs using different printing papers. Some use Kodak
>paper, others use Fuji, and others use Agfa paper. Each if these
>printing papers responds differently and using the same negative, you
>will get 3 differing prints.
Not only the paper but the chemistry is different amongst labs. When Kodak
got on highhorse pricing other companies popped up and many labs never went
back. Differing labs probably do have a preference for brands of paper, but
the reason is money, who did you get the best deal from, terms, free
shipping, promos etc. Most papers today are pretty good but I can buy six
brands not three, you forget Mitsubishi for one, plus there are others who
buy Kodak's cut ends etc. Every batch of paper can be different, so we try
to buy the largest batch we can afford so we don't have to recalibrate to
the new paper. No they all respond the same but different papers have
tendencies (depends on the batch) and we have channels for each brand to
start with and then we make corrections.
>The best way to get the hair color that you are familiar with, is to
>shoot a transparency. Then tell the lab to make a print to match the
>transparency as close as possible. They will not be able to match it
>100%, as transparency film has a greater color range than printing
>paper, but at least it will give the pro lab an idea of what your
>talking about.
A dog chasing its tail, again pay us and we will play your game. Solution
here is to take print and negative back to the lab and simply ask them to
correct it. I would gladly correct for any customer except what we call
constant pain in the asses, every lab has two or three who you just can't
satisfy no matter what and we tell them their work is so good they should
really go see so and so for their work. And they reply with "But he sent me
here!" Some pros (real pros) are very consistent, we know what they like
and actually channel some stuff for them. But most are all over the map
with no consistency and you can't afford to retrain them, they know it all.
I said it once at the PMA. part of being a PROFESSIONAL photographer should
require the participant to have worked in a lab for a year.
>
>One other thing, as you had daylight falling on the hair, you need to
>know that daylight has a different color temperature throughout the
>day. As the day approaches sunset, you will see that the spectrum is
>shifted towards the red and this in turn will shift all the colors
>around you towards the lower spectrum (red). Keep this in mind when
>your using syncro-sunlight.
No argument here, remember the pros with florescents.......this could be the
problem or I suspect the kid might have a lttle red highlight in her hair
and if they had to tweak the print to white it .......
Sometimes the fault is not the labs.........He said in the opening line Im a
newbie.....I respect his opinion.
Simple solution and the real answer to this thread was to take the neg and
print to the lab (remember it could be a K-Mart, Wal-Mart, Eckerd,
Walgreens) and ask them to reprint....
Good Luck
digital
Ruben Sanchez wrote:
> Don,
>
> First of all, using an 18% gray card with print film, won't guarantee
> that a pro lab will produce the correct hair color.
it is alot better then anything else available, why in the heck would feed this
crap to this person........
> You can take that
> same negative to 10 different pro labs, and you'll get 10 different
> prints with 10 different hair colors.
not totally true, if they all read the gray card correctly and print everything
else based on that reading your images will be equal to that first frame, now that
also means you had to shoot the entire roll under the same light you shot the gray
card..........
> The main reason for this, is that
> not all print machines are calibrated to the same standard, and you have
> different print machines manufactured by different companies.
and it is for this very reason you shoot a gray card so they can take your first
frame and calibrate your film with your lighting with their paper and chemicals
and machine...................
yes this is what we call calibrating..........so your images will be the
same.......
> You also
> have different labs using different printing papers.
18% gray is 18% gray on any paper........
> Some use Kodak
> paper, others use Fuji, and others use Agfa paper. Each if these
> printing papers responds differently and using the same negative, you
> will get 3 differing prints.
wrong............you will get 18% gray............i suggest you do the test before
you spout off something you know nothing about.......
> The best way to get the hair color that you are familiar with, is to
> shoot a transparency. Then tell the lab to make a print to match the
> transparency as close as possible.
and pray tell me idiot, how in the hell did you get the transparency film
calibrated...............i guess you just picked a roll up at the store and it was
balanced for this girls hair...............dugh............
> They will not be able to match it
> 100%, as transparency film has a greater color range than printing
> paper, but at least it will give the pro lab an idea of what your
> talking about.
no it want.......
> One other thing, as you had daylight falling on the hair, you need to
> know that daylight has a different color temperature throughout the
> day. As the day approaches sunset, you will see that the spectrum is
> shifted towards the red and this in turn will shift all the colors
> around you towards the lower spectrum (red).
yea but if you had shot a gray card during anyone of that time then your gray card
would match the lighting on the hair........it really is quite simple......
eric
digital
that deals with kodak sets up there machines with the industry standard called
"shirly" now if you do not know what this is i suggest you do a little more
homework before spouting off wrong facts........
eric
Ruben Sanchez wrote:
> Don wrote:
>
> > > > Hi I am a newbie and have a Canon Elan II, I took some pictures of my
> > > > daughter using the P mode and the Pic mode with and with out flash with
> > > > a good amount of light coming in from the window. The pictures came out
> > > > very good ( at least to me) but her hair was more to the redish side
> > > > instead of her dirty blonde color. She does have red highlights in her
> > > > hair but they are not always visible, and I did not notice them while
> > > > taking the pictures.
>
> Don,
>
> First of all, using an 18% gray card with print film, won't guarantee
> that a pro lab will produce the correct hair color. You can take that
> same negative to 10 different pro labs, and you'll get 10 different
> prints with 10 different hair colors. The main reason for this, is that
> not all print machines are calibrated to the same standard, and you have
> different print machines manufactured by different companies. You also
> have different labs using different printing papers. Some use Kodak
> paper, others use Fuji, and others use Agfa paper. Each if these
> printing papers responds differently and using the same negative, you
> will get 3 differing prints.
>
> The best way to get the hair color that you are familiar with, is to
> shoot a transparency. Then tell the lab to make a print to match the
> transparency as close as possible. They will not be able to match it
> 100%, as transparency film has a greater color range than printing
> paper, but at least it will give the pro lab an idea of what your
> talking about.
>
> One other thing, as you had daylight falling on the hair, you need to
> know that daylight has a different color temperature throughout the
> day. As the day approaches sunset, you will see that the spectrum is
> shifted towards the red and this in turn will shift all the colors
> around you towards the lower spectrum (red). Keep this in mind when
> your using syncro-sunlight.
>
> Good Luck,
> R Sanchez
Efam
My daughter has a lovely Red/Blonde hair color that was difficult to capture
properly every time I photographed her.
Three things made the difference.
1) 18% Gray card.....it does allow the lab to calibrate the final
print.....but this also depends on the quality of the lab you use. Which
brings me to 2.
2) Pay a little more. If your doing enlargements you don't want to send them
into your local mass merchant retailer and trust whoever they sent them to.
(Ever had them loose a roll of film? Many times you cant just "re shoot"
your subject.
3) Film choice.....This is a biggie as well. Don't trust the reviews in the
magazines as exposure, metering and subject make a difference here. I use
different brand for different subjects.
Oh well just try the gray card and see if you don't have better results.
Alex
digital wrote in message <36E59C2C...@mindspring.com>...
M. V.
digital wrote in message <36E3397C...@mindspring.com>...
>
>on the first frame of the next roll of film shoot a gray card (an 18% gray
>card) this will give the lab (pro or amatuer) something that they can take
a
>reading from and make a nuetral exposure from................
>
>ask yourself this how in the hell do you think the lab would know what
Ruben Sanchez
>
> Good try Ruben but some of your data is wrong and you are coaching this
> newbie in the way a pro would address it and maybe he's not that committed.
> I would believe he's using an fast finisher and not a real pro lab. I could
> be wrong but read the post.
>
> First it starts with the negatives, these one hour labs are set for higher
> temperatures and faster development times. Next the type of C-41 processor,
> roller or dip and dunk. We converted everything to dip and dunk with burst
> agitation to get better consistency and to avoid scratches which we have
> almost totally eliminated. And we do dip and dunk E-6 with a special water
> rinse provision for the cleanest slides you ever seen. Up to 8x10... We do
> a lot of E-6 from NY .
>
> Actually a Macbeth helps us more. Ten good labs would vary slightly, but
> the variance should be because of the operators read and or override of the
> machine and since exposure changes density it can also enhance a problem.
Allan,
No, I wasn't discussing 1-hr labs such as Wal-Mart or K-Mart, I was
talking about real pro labs used by professionals. A few other things I
didn't talk about was that you can also take the same negative to
printer Bob, at XYZ Pro Lab, and he will produce a different print from
operator Bill, who also works at XYZ Pro Lab. That's why I sometimes
get nice prints one day, and the next day I get junk from the same lab.
Whereas Bob thinks his prints are ok, Bill thinks his need more
magenta. This happens because neither Bob's or Bill's personal color
perception is calibrated to any one standard. Granted, Bob's prints are
consistant, but they are always too cyan, and all of Bill's prints are
always too magenta. Yet they both compare their test prints with a
Macbeth color chart, and they see no difference. This I know from
working with the same pro lab for many years. Everytime they hire a new
$7.00 per hour print operator, my prints might or might not look alright
to me.
Just becasue they say the prints are color corrected and that the
machines are calibrated, still might not satisfy MY standards. Kodak
and Fuji do have their standards, but mine is the one that the pro labs
have to satisfy, as I pay their bill......not Kodak or Fuji.
In the end, the photographer has the last word on what his prints should
look like. Any lab that doesn't meet what the pro photograher asks for,
well, can we say K-Mart Photo Lab?
R Sanchez
zeitgeist
places. The reds picked up could have been from the late sun, from the
hair conditioner she used.
Years ago their was a rumor that the reason phosphates were removed from
clothes detergents wasn't cause environmentalists claimed they were
destroying life on earth, but that Kodak was upset that residue left on
clothes caused them photograph in strangly shifted colors and the
viewers were blaming kodak film.
Don
I got, I decided to take the prints back to the store (Ritz Camera) and it was
discovered that they did not have the correct color channels set up in their
machine? Something about using kodak film and fuji film and having to correct
balance. Anyway they re-did the pictures and the red hair is gone and the skin
tones are much lighter than the originals. I did take a picture of my daughter
with me so that they could see the color of hair.
Eric, I will have to get some gray cards and try it again and see what the
diffrence might be.
thanks for all the responses
Don
digital wrote:
> you screwed up.............here is how to correct it if it is really that
> big of a deal........
>
> on the first frame of the next roll of film shoot a gray card (an 18% gray
> card) this will give the lab (pro or amatuer) something that they can take a
> reading from and make a nuetral exposure from................
>
> ask yourself this how in the hell do you think the lab would know what color
> your daughters hair was?
>
> eric
>
> Don wrote:
>
> > Hi I am a newbie and have a Canon Elan II, I took some pictures of my
> > daughter using the P mode and the Pic mode with and with out flash with
> > a good amount of light coming in from the window. The pictures came out
> > very good ( at least to me) but her hair was more to the redish side
> > instead of her dirty blonde color. She does have red highlights in her
> > hair but they are not always visible, and I did not notice them while
> > taking the pictures.
> >
Alan
Don, Im glad you solved your problem. Go back to the posts and look at two
simple recommendations I made to you.
I said: Good try Ruben but some of your data is wrong and you are coaching
this
newbie in the way a pro would address it and maybe he's not that committed.
I would believe he's using an fast finisher and not a real pro lab. I could
be wrong but read the post.
Ritz uses Noritsu's and they are hot fast finishers.....higher development
temperature and shorter development time.
What they probably did was to run the Kodak on the Fuji Channel or visa
versa..in Kodak the channel overcorrects reds.. and Fiji is way more green
sensitive...easy mistake when you do the one hour dance.....We dont do pro
work based on one hour. We have one hour if the amateurs request it, most
pros would rather wait a day for proofing and get it right. And I wish I
could pay a good printer 7.00 an hour. Our girls get XXXX that.
A dog chasing its tail, again pay us and we will play your game. Solution
here is to take print and negative back to the lab and simply ask them to
correct it. Just bring a swatch of hair to the lab ( didn't mean to bring
the whole child) and see if they can reprint closer.
Ive always suggested that labs not only use CMYK and RGB but should add
CLAROIL to their print wheels. Might of sounded like a joke but to models
with color work its not...
Im glad you got it resolved.
{{:>]}
Alan
digital
your self a mcbeth color checker. now they are expensive $55.00 but if you really
want to do it right what i do is put the gray card and the mcbeth card in the scence
this is the way i calibrate my digital.......you can get the mcbeth from
calumet......................
eric
Don wrote:
> After looking over the pictures several times and reading all the responses that
> I got, I decided to take the prints back to the store (Ritz Camera) and it was
> discovered that they did not have the correct color channels set up in their
> machine? Something about using kodak film and fuji film and having to correct
> balance. Anyway they re-did the pictures and the red hair is gone and the skin
> tones are much lighter than the originals. I did take a picture of my daughter
> with me so that they could see the color of hair.
>
Efam
Where can a person purchase a color checker as none of my local dealers have
on.....I'm sure they could order it but then I just as well mail order
it....save a couple of bucks and at least a week.
Also, does it really help a pro lab calibrate the prints AND what about
differences in film....will you still get different colors with different
films?
Alex
digital wrote in message <36E7D8C3...@mindspring.com>...
digital
Efam wrote:
> Eric,
>
> Where can a person purchase a color checker as none of my local dealers have
> on...
call calumet and ask for a mcbeth color chart............1-800-CALUMET
> ..I'm sure they could order it but then I just as well mail order
> it....save a couple of bucks and at least a week.
>
> Also, does it really help a pro lab calibrate the prints
ask yourself if you sent in a roll of 120 with 12 images on it and there was no
standard color on the film for the lab to look at the person making the prints
will only have their experience to go by...............
> AND what about
> differences in film..
yep you gotta do the test for every type of color film you use...........
> ..will you still get different colors with different
> films?
if you dont test them out you will........ yes here is a trick i was taught and
it works great if you do alot of print work...............the main difference
from a custom print and a machine print is color correcting............
so go purchase as much film as you can for the particular type you use (this is
why i tried to keep my studio limited to only two films of each type) and make
some exposures with the color checker.......have the lab run your
prints......when you get the exact color you need ask them what the color pack
that they used is......then go get you some cc filters and put them over your
lens and from then on for that batch of film all the lab will need to do is dial
in the machine to zero to print your prints because you already did the color
correcting for them..............now you can order machine prints and get custom
quality...............
Efam
Thanks for the tip, I even printed it out so as not to skip a step.
I'll give it a try, shoot I'm always looking to produce a better picture.
See ya
Alex
digital wrote in message <36E894DE...@mindspring.com>...
solar bear
<5521...@g23.relcom.ru> wrote:
> Don wrote:
>
> > Hi I am a newbie and have a Canon Elan II, I took some pictures of my
> > daughter
>
> And you're sure you're not a child molester? Most of that shit happens
> within the family, you know.... And taking pictures is very suspect
> anyway.
>
> Bernard
Hey! Didn't Sherry just warn you about this sort of senseless prattle?
Oh wait... she's not here anymore.
As you were.