Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,991   Posts: 1,524,210   Online: 1149
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11
    Pfiltz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NW TN. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Although we tend to think in terms of longer shutter speeds when we consider reciprocity failure, the actual cause for that type of reciprocity failure is that the light that actually reaches the film is at a very low intensity. If you can increase the intensity of the light reaching the film, by using either more light on the scene or a larger aperture, the reciprocity may not fail.
    Exactly Matt, I believe..

    This was in a factory, with probably 40' ceilings or higher. Very dark in there relative to shooting near an open door, which I didn't have access too.

    Good learning experience for me. I've heard of Reciprocity Failure, but never could get my head around it.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    MD
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    284
    Is there an exposure problem? It's possible I'm mis-interpreting what you were going for, but your exposure looks right on to me. The question is the foggy portion. If reciprocity failure were the issue you wouldn't have a picture at all, at least not in the dark portions.
    Not sure about the fog.

  3. #13
    Pfiltz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NW TN. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    177
    Horace, that's what has me scratching my head. According the folks at FreeStyle I should be considering RF at 8 seconds, but then again, you can read the numbers on the dial. Maybe I screwed the pooch in development.

    It's all new to me, as far as long exposures go, if you want to consider 8 sec. long. It was for me.

  4. #14
    DWThomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,207
    Images
    63
    Your mention of "kind of foggy looking in the middle" and the location of that area suggests to me inadequate fixing, perhaps largely due to ineffective agitation. If there is truly any milky appearance in that area of the negative, I would re-fix with good agitation and re-wash as a first step. I ran into that situation with a foray into 4x5 film in pinhole work a few years back. In my case it was a T-grain film that seemed to need more than the usual time in the fixer.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,352
    Images
    87
    Yes, that foggy looking area looks like it may be inadequate fixing to me as well. Does it have a white-ish, milky look to it, especially when it was wet? If so, it's a fixing problem, either your fix is spent, contaminated, or you just didn't give it enough time. Another round of fixing should take care of it.
    Note that if that area were due to an exposure issue, it would likey be less dense, but but since it looks light in a positive, it has more density.

    Other than that, since there is so much shadow area, it will be a thin looking negative no matter what The area away from the cloudy part looks ok, given the conditions you've described.

  6. #16
    Pfiltz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NW TN. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    177
    Update: It was the fix. I dipped it back in the fix for 2 minutes, and washed it, and the fog is gone...

    Didn't know you could re-fix a neg. Nice to know though.

    Thanks all

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Downers Grove Illinois
    Posts
    1,050
    You can not over agitate fix. I always use excessive agitation. Film is by strict pattern, time, & temp.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Western Suburbs
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,435
    Flare due a reflection off an item that wasn't noticed?

    Neal Wydra

  9. #19
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,375
    Images
    1
    iwouldextendmeasured 8s to 16 actual seconds of exposure due to reciprocity or go from f16 to f11and avoid much of the reciprocity issue. also counting time is highly inaccurate. get a stop watch or a special timer for long exposures.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  10. #20
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,624
    Images
    40
    I find when counting one-ansel-adams, two-ansel adams, etc, that the accuracy of my timing is well within acceptable limits...actually I tend to count slow, if anything, so that helps to take care of some of the RFailure.

    Of course what one considers acceptable limits will vary a bit.
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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