Ruined photos.
Discussion
A while ago I shot 3 rolls of B+W film at my niece's wedding. There was an official photographer but my interest on this occasion was candid shots, capturing those moments that happen here and there when you get lots of family together. I've taken photos like this before at many weddings over the years and often the results are good enough to be included in the wedding album.
Normally I'd send the films to Ilford for processing but this time I thought I'd use the independent camera shop in town.
A couple of weeks later I called into the shop to pick up the prints, opened up the first envelope and the negatives sprang out on the floor. Non of the negatives in any of the three envelopes were in sleeves.
The photos were of very poor quality, underexposed and many had tram lines and dust marks. Initially I thought the camera must have had grit in the back which had scored the negatives but the scratches were not always parallel but sometimes curved or diagonal across the photos.
In short the whole lot was well and truly f
ked !
I took them back to the shop, pointed out the problems and the shop offered to have them reprinted. I pointed out it was the negatives that were damaged but they assured me they knew someone who was a master of the digital manipulation and all would be well. They took my number and said they'd be in touch.
6 weeks later, having heard nothing, I called into the shop and was told they'd tried to contact me (?) and had had no luck with the photos so far. I checked they had my correct telephone number and left with them telling me they'd be in touch.
6 weeks later, having heard nothing, I called into the shop and was told my prints were ready. They'd tried to contact me but somehow hadn't (?) The print's were of course just as grim as before, worse in fact with added dust and finger prints. The whole lot are a disaster.
I'm heartily pissed off with all this, not only the ruined photos but also the terrible customer service.
The man in the shop shrugged and offered to reimburse the cost of the processing. I feel that's small change and that I should be recompensed for their utter incompetence.
Has anyone come across this situation before ? Is there a legal precedent ?
Normally I'd send the films to Ilford for processing but this time I thought I'd use the independent camera shop in town.
A couple of weeks later I called into the shop to pick up the prints, opened up the first envelope and the negatives sprang out on the floor. Non of the negatives in any of the three envelopes were in sleeves.
The photos were of very poor quality, underexposed and many had tram lines and dust marks. Initially I thought the camera must have had grit in the back which had scored the negatives but the scratches were not always parallel but sometimes curved or diagonal across the photos.
In short the whole lot was well and truly f
ked !I took them back to the shop, pointed out the problems and the shop offered to have them reprinted. I pointed out it was the negatives that were damaged but they assured me they knew someone who was a master of the digital manipulation and all would be well. They took my number and said they'd be in touch.
6 weeks later, having heard nothing, I called into the shop and was told they'd tried to contact me (?) and had had no luck with the photos so far. I checked they had my correct telephone number and left with them telling me they'd be in touch.
6 weeks later, having heard nothing, I called into the shop and was told my prints were ready. They'd tried to contact me but somehow hadn't (?) The print's were of course just as grim as before, worse in fact with added dust and finger prints. The whole lot are a disaster.
I'm heartily pissed off with all this, not only the ruined photos but also the terrible customer service.
The man in the shop shrugged and offered to reimburse the cost of the processing. I feel that's small change and that I should be recompensed for their utter incompetence.
Has anyone come across this situation before ? Is there a legal precedent ?
Because old.
And nostalgic. I have a trusty Nikon F4 that doesn't see the light of day often enough and a wedding is a good excuse.
But I think I've learned my lesson this time round. Good and proper. iphone it is from now on.
My red light days have been over for a fair few years, goodness knows where I put my enlarger.
And nostalgic. I have a trusty Nikon F4 that doesn't see the light of day often enough and a wedding is a good excuse.
But I think I've learned my lesson this time round. Good and proper. iphone it is from now on.
My red light days have been over for a fair few years, goodness knows where I put my enlarger.
loughran said:
But I think I've learned my lesson this time round. Good and proper. iphone it is from now on.
If you can use an F4 and a smartphone you can use a DSLR. Or if you want to stay with film, send it to competent processors.To answer the question, their liability is probably limited to the cost of D&P.
loughran said:
Because old.
But I think I've learned my lesson this time round. Good and proper. ......
.......... goodness knows where I put my enlarger.
Old is no excuse But I think I've learned my lesson this time round. Good and proper. ......
.......... goodness knows where I put my enlarger.
.But if you would like to keep using film for something important just use a belt and braces system;
shoot twice as many rolls as you need (two bodies would help) and keep half of them back until you've
seen the results of the first tranche from the lab.
Re. compensation - the only time I suffered a 'crash' in the lab (over a period of 40 years) with spoiled film as a result,
we negotiated a settlement whereby they processed the next n+1 rolls of film without charge.
I've not shot film for 13 years and although I like the look of black and white prints from analogue
I'd never go back to film ........... I've got a loft full of black & white enlargers
.
loughran said:
The photos ..., very poor quality .... underexposed ... tram lines ... dust marks..... scored the negatives ..... scratches .....
In short .... well and truly %€*# the problems ..... the negatives .... were damaged .... a master of the digital manipulation .... all would be well...... .......added dust and finger prints......
Hey! Don’t knock it - you’ve just invented “Hipstamatic”In short .... well and truly %€*# the problems ..... the negatives .... were damaged .... a master of the digital manipulation .... all would be well...... .......added dust and finger prints......
(Commiserations though; your own processing, or someone you’d reliably used previously only!)
Simpo Two said:
If you can use an F4 and a smartphone you can use a DSLR. Or if you want to stay with film, send it to competent processors.
To answer the question, their liability is probably limited to the cost of D&P.
Can't imagine that there are very many B&W processors out there nowadays. Clearly, anyone with appropriate skills has moved on long ago (hardly surprisingly)To answer the question, their liability is probably limited to the cost of D&P.
Well on reflection I shouldn't have used the term flamed, but he was told that he should be using digital. I am all for digital but I think it is great that some still like to use film. He used black and white film, took it to a professional (although not very good) developing service and it appears his property was treated with at best no regard and at worst with contempt. He is of course really gutted, and being told he should be using digital isn't really helpful is it?
johnymac said:
Well on reflection I shouldn't have used the term flamed, but he was told that he should be using digital. I am all for digital but I think it is great that some still like to use film. He used black and white film, took it to a professional (although not very good) developing service and it appears his property was treated with at best no regard and at worst with contempt. He is of course really gutted, and being told he should be using digital isn't really helpful is it?
1) He said he's not using film because he likes it, but because he's 'old'.2) He said he was going to use a smartphone from now on - which is digital!
So he might as well grasp the nettle and do it properly
First post mentioned no neg sleeves. I took a stack of 6 slides to our local photo shop for printing, these were about 25 years old.
I took them in a plastic box for obvious reason, whilst the senior lady start writing out the receipt etc, her assistant took them out of the box, put them into a stack of 6 slides, and held them between thumb and forefinger firmly planted on the slide face, not even gloves.
From memory I think my slightly raised voice startled both of them. Same place some time later I was trying out my Pentax v a Canon with a B & W film, when I picked it up, the film was totally clear, obviously developed but not even the I.d, on the film and neg numbers, boy said my problem.
Following day I took it back when the boss was in, upshot, he had processed a B & W film in colour chemistry. Doh........
I took them in a plastic box for obvious reason, whilst the senior lady start writing out the receipt etc, her assistant took them out of the box, put them into a stack of 6 slides, and held them between thumb and forefinger firmly planted on the slide face, not even gloves.
From memory I think my slightly raised voice startled both of them. Same place some time later I was trying out my Pentax v a Canon with a B & W film, when I picked it up, the film was totally clear, obviously developed but not even the I.d, on the film and neg numbers, boy said my problem.
Following day I took it back when the boss was in, upshot, he had processed a B & W film in colour chemistry. Doh........
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff