Switch to English Language Passer en langue franηaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,674   Posts: 1,669,080   Online: 1155
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38
  1. #21
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,898
    Images
    122
    You might not need as much exposure as your meter might suggest as it is trying to translate the scene into an 18% grey average daylight scene whereas you actually want it darker. i.e. to look like night time.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  2. #22
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,010
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    I think it important to remember a few things.

    1-that the real speed of the film doesn't move near as much with a change of development as the typical EI change that gets applied. Shadow detail is lost.

    2-that as the film curve gets steeper tone changes get more abrupt. Mid-tone transitions get grittier.

    3-that printable whites are closer to the toe too. Detail is lost in the highlights too.

    Pushing has become a technique of last resort for me because night street scenes are actually high contrast affairs.

    If you apply classic Adams/zone system logic it is likely a pull is going to be indicated rather than a push.

    rich815's shot above is a good example. The detail in the street lights didn't print and the detail in the coat is really limited. That's not a critisism, it's simply a choice based on the result wanted.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaοs Nin

  3. #23
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,811
    Images
    300
    And something to remember is that at night we see mostly tungsten lighting, which usually means about a stop less sensitivity compared to daylight.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  4. #24
    choppastyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    You might not need as much exposure as your meter might suggest as it is trying to translate the scene into an 18% grey average daylight scene whereas you actually want it darker. i.e. to look like night time.
    This. If you want a dark nighttime look you probably should underexpose according to your meter. I've shot 200 at night with a f1.8 lens and not had too many problems. Autofocus is pretty much useless though... For B/W I like the look of Neopan 400 or TriX at 1600 anyway.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	6357618599_f1bc3c0e5b_z.jpg 
Views:	42 
Size:	173.0 KB 
ID:	53977
    Last edited by choppastyle; 07-15-2012 at 05:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    I take donations for beer and film​.

  5. #25
    Pioneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,429
    Images
    4
    Just as a quick comment, some of these shots are gorgeous. Great work.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    ɹǝpun uʍop puɐl
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    I have had very good results using http://www.scribd.com/doc/2604955/jiffy and only shooting one exposure with slide film. If you can nail the exposure with one exposure on slide film, you can't get much better than that. In fact for night photography, I use this rather than my in camera light meters [Nikon SLR] or Hasselblad, or even my Gossen. Light meters end up over compensating for the unlit areas, unless one uses a spot meter.

    Steve
    Its available as public domain Steve http://www.southbristolviews.com/pic.../JiffyCalc.pdf so no dload fees.

    Instruction for using it can also be found here ...
    http://photocamel.com/forum/camera-a...-can-help.html
    —-oooO—-
    —-(—)—-
    —–\–(–
    ——\_)-
    ———–Oooo—
    ———–(—-)—
    ————)–/—-
    ———-(_/-
    Ant.
    ɹǝpun uʍop puɐl ǝɥʇ ɯoɹɟ

    oneant.com.au

  7. #27
    Leighgion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Orcas Island, WA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    357
    Images
    16
    Sure, as others have already said, all depends on how dark our streets are, how fast your lens is, how steady are your hands and what your subjects are.

    If I shoot B&W at night, I push. However, I once decided to walk my (very dark countryside streets) at night with color 400 speed and my Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 to see what was possible. I didn't shoot moving subjects, but did quite alright with still ones handheld.


    Upside Down Ultramax by Leighgion, on Flickr

  8. #28
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by rich815 View Post
    I've been surprised how nice many night shots have come out using 400 speed film and shot with my Contax G2 with my 45/2 Planar wide open at 1/15th.
    This is also my experience. Well-lit urban zones or monuments usually require EV4 @ 100 ISO. That corresponds to 1/15@f/2 @ 400 ISO. As Mark says, inevitably you will have both blocked shadows and some burned highlights, but the scene will be rendered as a night scene with a well described subject matter. If one wants to nail the exposure better the only* possibility is a spot light meter.

    The first picture, Saint Peter's clock, had such sharp lighting that even while using a spot light meter (which was not so spot as I was several hundreds of meters away so the 1° angle covered a "large" area) I had to bracket some 0.5 EV to be sure not to burn the highlights. This is one of the few occasions, and the only one I remember, where I did bracket exposure. I remember I always was quite in the vicinity of EV4@100 ISO.

    http://fineartamerica.com/featured/1...o-ruggeri.html

    http://fineartamerica.com/featured/s...o-ruggeri.html

    * Besides bracketing, that is.

    The general experience I have now is that EV4@100 ISO is very likely to work well with slides. Walking around with a negative film I would use EV4@100 ISO without using any light meter.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  9. #29
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,010
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Diapositivo View Post
    As Mark says, inevitably you will have both blocked shadows and some burned highlights, but the scene will be rendered as a night scene with a well described subject matter. If one wants to nail the exposure better the only* possibility is a spot light meter.
    Actually my point is that pushing is a choice (one of last resort for me), not a given. Detail need not be lost without thought and mid-tones need not be gritty unless you want them that way.

    Street scenes at night, can be photographed quite nicely when film is used at it's ISO speed and developed normally.

    That choice just means that we may need to adjust how we shoot, that we may need to carry a little extra gear, and even break the stereotype. Adding a touch of fill flash is a helpful thing used by pros, as are: bean bags, posts, walls, monopods and other camera supports.

    Also spot metering isn't the only choice either. Yes for many shots, like your clock, it may be quite practical but where ever you can get into the scene, incident metering works just fine. The Jiffy Calc oneANT and Sirius talked about above works well too, the Ultimate Exposure Computer works nicely too.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaοs Nin

  10. #30
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Incident metering and night doesn't necessarily work very well and I personally would advice against it. In sun light the sun is so to speak always the same, one has a value for sunlit areas and a value for shadows.

    With artificial light, and floodlights in particular, the sources of light is ambiguous and/or not reachable - think the dome of a church lit by floodlights, one cannot go up the dome to measure what's the light there - its distance from the subject is important for exposure and any kind of "averaging" can be very misleading because of the great brightness range.

    Imagine a street lamp on a house, projecting light on the house (an awful lot, but diminishing very fast) and on the street. In this situation an incident light meter is basically useless. Besides, light sources at night are often in the frame and they must not be counted as far as exposure calculation is concerned, and with an incident light meter one ends up always calculating, in the exposure, also the brightness of the street lamps.

    "Table" exposure is as we agree quite reliable in this situation.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin