Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,767   Posts: 1,516,462   Online: 904
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,585
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Fresh film is a good thing and can help but its not a guarantee.

    You may need to re-think how you are defining underexposure.

    True underexposure is where you have lost real detail and can't easily print what you want, like the first two examples you provided.

    If you got all the info you needed on the negative, like in post 9, you did not underexpose.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  2. #12
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    I assume that you shot these photos somewhere on a college/university campus. Presumably in a common area of a dorm, a library or the student union?

    I absolutely agree that low light and under exposure are the root cause of the problem but, further, I might add that most public areas in college buildings have icky light for photography. Usually fluorescent and/or indirect incandescent which often produces flat, lifeless and difficult to expose lighting conditions.

    The human eye quickly adjusts to those conditions but cameras don't. Consequently, you have to be more conscious of the light you are shooting under when you go from one lighting condition to another, especially when shooting indoors.

    For example, the first two shots probably came out crummy because you were in the middle of a room where there was little or no direct light. Only diffuse, room light. In the second two shots you seemed to be near a window or under a light fixture which gave you better, more direct light.

    Bottom line: Learn to watch your light and use that to achieve the picture you want.

    I don't know how many times I have been sizing up a picture and passed on it because the light wasn't what I wanted.
    People often look confused when I tell them, "I don't like the light."
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/randystankey/

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    917
    The photographer.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    544
    The lab's automatic printing machine compensated for thin negatives by giving too little exposure to the paper to give good blacks, thus showing up the grain. Machines are stoopid - if you want the low key look, print them so the shadows are black, not a dull grey.
    testing...

  5. #15
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,105
    Quote Originally Posted by tron_ View Post
    Here is an example of what an underexposed shot looked like off my last roll:

    Attachment 58034
    Ok, I'll quantify it. The negatives from the first photographs presented in the original post are SEVERELY underexposed. If you post a scan of the negatives it will be much more clear (pun intended ).

  6. #16
    Andre Noble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    220
    Underexposure.
    Andre Noble, Beverly Hills California http://andrenoble.com/

  7. #17
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,020
    Images
    60
    Underexposure, plus the effects of trying to adjust for it through the adjustments available to those who print or scan.

    The OP is seeing variations in the results because the adjustments vary.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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