film processing/filter question

[Typhon]

I know these are two unrelated questions (which will probably sound stupid to everyone) but I'll post both here so as not to make two topics.

First, does it make a difference where film is processed? I have a roll of Velvia that I want done - shall I just leave it to Jessops, or find somewhere else to have it processed?
EDIT: That's processed, and scanned

Second, I have a Hoya Pro1 Digital UV filter. Can I still use it for shooting with a film camera, or is it only suitable for digital cameras, since it's apparently made for digital cameras?

Edited by Typhon on Tuesday 6th March 00:13

[beano500]

Part 1

Everylab you go to will, in theory, be variable as to how they process a film. In the good ol' days there used to be regular reviews in teh Amateur Pornographers and Photo Monthlies to check out these labs.

Jessops would probably come out as good value. In theory Fujilab should be the "best" - but then there's always personal taste/preference.

As far as scanning goes, it's a similar proposition. In the past I've had a develop and scan and been really hacked off with the noise and general issues with the contrast and saturation of the scanned files. But, unless you're going to buy a scanner and do that yourself you have no control either.

Probably find that Jessops are a good, fairly reliable standard.

Others I have used inlude Lab 35 and their sister company Lab 120, but I wouldn't know how good they are today, suffice to say that up to two years ago I trusted them with everything include "valuable" wedding shots.



Part 2

I have no idea why "digital" needs to appear in the full name of a UV filter. The only obvious thing to check (with the manufacturer) is whether it's a different spec to a "film" one because it takes into account the typical filters used in front of a digital sensor.

In theory a UV filter is a UV filter and should just filter out UV light rays. But, as you probably appreciate, not all filters are teh same - some are coated better (digital lenses tend to be better coatings than earlier examples) some will filter different wavelengths (a bit like cheap and "better" brands of sunglasses?) so "you pays yer money and takes yer choice!"

But, bottom line, no reason why you shouldn't test out the filter on film and see what difference it makes.

[Typhon]

Thanks very much

I'll probably try a few different labs out and see if there's any real difference. Same with the filter, although like you I can't see how it would make any difference - it's just the 'Digital' in the name that got me thinking

[beano500]

At least you know it's been designed and manufactured in the last few (ten?) years. Probably best coating for the money and that's probably (along with a decent lens hood) the best treatment you can give an image, whether digital or film.

[matthew_h]

"Digital" when it comes to filters is mainly in relation the the coatings due to the added risk of reflections on the back side of the filter as well as the front when used with a digital camera. "Digital" filters are coated both sides.

It will work absolutely fine with a film camera

[EmmaP]

I see that you are in Nottingham.

I used to use Service Graphics on Lower Parliament Street, but they no longer process film.

Viva Imaging on North Gate, New Basford, were another lab I used regularly.

Also, Photo, Unit 8, Karlsruhe House, Queens Bridge Road (next door to the Vat and Fiddle pub and opposite the railway station.) Tel: [phone] (Mick Payne)

[Typhon]

EmmaP said:

I see that you are in Nottingham.

I used to use Service Graphics on Lower Parliament Street, but they no longer process film.

Viva Imaging on North Gate, New Basford, were another lab I used regularly.

Also, Photo, Unit 8, Karlsruhe House, Queens Bridge Road (next door to the Vat and Fiddle pub and opposite the railway station.) Tel: [phone] (Mick Payne)

Cheers! I'll definatley check those out - probably Photo first as they're not too far from me

Edited by Typhon on Tuesday 6th March 19:15

[EmmaP]

Took a couple of films into them the other week and have used them before. Owner is really helpful and they are recommended by Service Graphics.

[Famous Graham]

beano500 said:

In the good ol' days there used to be regular reviews in teh Amateur Pornographers

Freudian?

[EmmaP]

Famous Graham said:

beano500 said:

In the good ol' days there used to be regular reviews in teh Amateur Pornographers

Freudian?

That remids me, the other week, at a college where I teach, somebody had placed 'PORN' over the 'PHOT' in PHOTOGRAPHY Needless to say I found it highly entertaining and didn't remove it.

I thought that everyone called it Amateur Pornographer.