when in doubt

[jnanian]

overexpose and overdevelop...always rather have something than nothing. (by the way I'm nearly always in doubt...keeps me on my toes?) :-))

i'm with you kate!

im not in doubt very often but have grown accustom to
over developed and over exposed film, it is my "normal" exposure these days :)

john

[Christopher Walrath]

I am SELDOM in doubt. I can muddle through anything though. I generally tend towards underexposure to gain slightly more contrast in negative film and print it up a bit.

[BetterSense]

When in doubt, overexpose and overdevelop. This is what I would do for a photo of important documentary value. There's a reason the old WWII photos are always a nice crispy chalk-and-soot tonality. Expose "enough" and develop generously was probably the method.

[Vaughn]

I would over-develop. Which really is not "over" develop, but just developed longer until the film is properly developed. I always develop my negs quite a bit more than "normal" -- sometimes for twice the "normal" amount. They are still not "over-developed", but developed just right so that I get easy to print 8x10 negatives for carbon printing.

I make mistakes, but someday maybe I'll have an assistant I can blame everything on.

Edited to add: Looks like what I wrote is gibberish, where is an assistant when one needs one?!

[Anon Ymous]

Ideally, I'd chose overexposure and underdevelopment, but being a 135 user, that's not always possible. Therefore, I voted overexpose. A bit more exposure with normal development won't really hurt, but overdevelopment is too bad IMHO.

[Q.G.]

When in doubt about what exactly?

I wouldn't drive back home again to see if i left the light on in the hall.

[Wade D]

Use the "Sunny 16" rule which, for me, tends to overexpose then under develop a bit. Most of my ancient meters overexpose as well.

[RalphLambrecht]

Apparently, 120 years of photographic research and education have been largely for the birds. The work of Hurter & Driffield, Loyd Jones, H. Condit, C. Nelson, Minor White, Fred Archer, Ansel Adams, Tom James, Richard Zakia, Phil Davis and many more seems to be unknown or ignored by most.

As long as we are talking about negative silver-gelatin photography, I'll stick to the old axiom:

When in doubt, overexpose and underdevelop.

It has served me well.

[eddym]

When in doubt, I shoot first and ask questions later.

[Ian Grant]

ian
i wanted more options but 10 was the limit!
guestimate was one of my original choices
as well as " hey, i ordered a sandwich " but
i had to prune the tree
john

Two options that are and always have been common where exposures have had to be estimated are:

1. Clip test, either cut a few frames from a roll of film & process as per normal, or if LF process one sheet first.

2. Develop by inspection.

In addition you could use a developer like D76/ID-11 or Xtol and use 1+3 dilution, which gives a slight increase in film speed & drops the overall contrast. This is safer than under developing.

Ian

[Bruce Watson]

I'm never in doubt. I use a spotmeter and develop according to the light conditions, I'm never wrong when I do that.

+1. No, +2. Exactly. I haven't missed an exposure in years. I no longer have any doubts about exposure. It's amazing how consistent one can be with a one degree spotmeter.