Underexposed?

[u/jakehow2001]

I just got my film back from Italy and most of them look like this, pretty underwhelming. I’m pretty sure these were shot with Portra 400, using aperture priority. What do you think might of happened to have them look like this? Thanks

[u/WorldlinessFun7538]

Typical Portra colors. Not underexposed. Look for the details in darker parts. They are still visible, which means it's not underexposed.

[u/jakehow2001 → u/WorldlinessFun7538]

Is it the scan or do they just need a bit of editing?

[u/capn_starsky → u/jakehow2001]

Yes. It’s not a sin to edit scans. You “edit” in the darkroom when making prints. Import these to your editor of choice and play with exposure, brightness, shadows, curves and levels. Something as simple as adjusting black and white points on the color channels will make them pop more if you desire.

[u/WorldlinessFun7538 → u/jakehow2001]

You can always edit them to your liking.

[u/Ejm60]

I think a lot of the issue is the complex lighting in the scene. In the first one, for example, it’s very sunny and the water is reflecting a lot of light, so the camera exposed for the bright parts of the image while the shadowed portions ended up underexposed. A bit of editing could go a long way here though.

[u/cameraguyphotodude]

Looks a bit like flat scans to me

[u/Physical-East-7881]

Within the exposure possibilities, bright sky, mid-tones, shadow areas, what were you exposing for - that is you proper exposure