Hi everyone,
I just got back two rolls of XP-2, which for various reasons mostly
involving me being disorganised had sat around undeveloped for a year. Some
of them came back fine, for example:
http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/photo/temp/chichi_market.jpg
http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/photo/temp/smoking_hole.jpg
Others came out oddly hazy around the highlights:
http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/photo/temp/waterfall.jpg
Still more came out quite clearly wrecked:
http://www.worldtraveller.f9.co.uk/photo/temp/aged_negative.jpg
Do you think the somewhat variable quality might be due to the year's delay
in processing them, or does it look more like the lab got it wrong? The
'aged negative' is the worst example, but a couple of others are almost as
bad.
Thanks,
Roger
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|
