"Fine Art" style of exposure

[Pandysloo]

You have to make that choice, if you simply underexpose and don't tell to processor what you want, they will try and fix your "mistake" and the result still won't be what you want.

That makes sense, though when you say "print" do you mean the creation of negatives, or actual prints? Because I've only had the lab produce negatives for me, which I then scanned using a film scanner without making any exposure adjustments or having any brightness controls enabled, and they all came out too bright.

[StoneNYC]

That makes sense, though when you say "print" do you mean the creation of negatives, or actual prints? Because I've only had the lab produce negatives for me, which I then scanned using a film scanner without making any exposure adjustments or having any brightness controls enabled, and they all came out too bright.

They mean going into a dark room that has an enlarger and "optically" printing... As in sending light through the film, through an enlarging lens, and adjusting light output/time to get a correct print on paper and develop that paper for best results.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

[markbarendt]

That makes sense, though when you say "print" do you mean the creation of negatives, or actual prints? Because I've only had the lab produce negatives for me, which I then scanned using a film scanner without making any exposure adjustments or having any brightness controls enabled, and they all came out too bright.

I'm doing my best here to speak metaphorically with regard to the process because your question is good. Talking specifics about digital is off topic at APUG.

What you have created is a proof, not a finished work. Proofs from negatives are simply used to decide what you want to do next, they are not meant for display or sharing.

Metaphorically, you have not adjusted the second exposure yet. Whether using an enlarger or a digital processes you need to adjust to get the output you want.

[jnanian]

Pandysloo

the negative is a film stencil
the print is what is made when light is shone through it
whether it is transferred to another media ( numerically )
or chemically ( paper )
the trick is to have fun making whichever one you decide you want to make ..

john

[Pandysloo]

Metaphorically, you have not adjusted the second exposure yet. Whether using an enlarger or a digital processes you need to adjust to get the output you want.

It was my understanding that my need to give the exposure a "second pass" (so to speak) was evidence of my incompetence. Meaning, that if I had exposed correctly, that no post adjustment would need to be made. But the correct way to go about is it capture as much tonality on the negative, then adjust exposure to taste when enlarging (or scanning), correct?

[markbarendt]

It was my understanding that my need to give the exposure a "second pass" (so to speak) was evidence of my incompetence. Meaning, that if I had exposed correctly, that no post adjustment would need to be made. But the correct way to go about is it capture as much tonality on the negative, then adjust exposure to taste when enlarging (or scanning), correct?

There isn't one absolute answer here. There are a variety of ways to shoot negatives "correctly".

For example TXP (Tri-X Professional 320) is a film with a very long toe. Some of us very much like the effect of the toe when shot at box speed, others prefer to give more exposure to get the subject matter up off the toe a ways; Both approaches are "correct".

Both approaches can also be "standardized" for an individual. The adjustments required "to print" can become standard and applied automatically so that the proofs are much closer to what the individual expects on the first try.

Still, a fine print almost always requires more adjustments.

[brian steinberger]

I think basically that what everyone is saying is expose for the shadows to get detail in them, and then if you want to print them black you can do so. But if you underexpose you will never be able to get information from them.

[markbarendt]

I think basically that what everyone is saying is expose for the shadows to get detail in them, and then if you want to print them black you can do so. But if you underexpose you will never be able to get information from them.

Actually I'm not trying to encourage extra exposure "just in case".

If I'm going to use TXP's toe to my advantage I need to expose accurately, extra exposure takes my toe away.

[JBrunner]

Hi Pandysloo,

The best advice I can give is to stop trying to do it in the camera. Prints happen in the darkroom. We have an old saying: " you can't print what isn't there" and it is very true. You can on the other hand choose not to print what is there by controlling your contrast and exposure during printing. Add dodging and burning to that and you are on your way. Prints that look like the one you referenced usually start out with the photographer striving to make the most expansive negative he can, and then printing it a little hard. When you have a negative that goes to ten you can do that, have your hard blacks, and still hold the highlights. If you printed the negative I've attached straight up it would look like mud, because in order to get the latitude to handle the contrast that's the way I made it. You could use this negative for welding goggles. If it hasn't been made that way there wouldn't have been a hope in hell for the stuff in the middle and on down. I chose where to have black fall, something I wouldn't have been able to do with a negative that had been truncated by under exposure. I hope that makes some sense.

[Pandysloo]

Some of us very much like the effect of the toe when shot at box speed

Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly is a "toe?"

Prints that look like the one you referenced usually start out with the photographer striving to make the most expansive negative he can, and then printing it a little hard.

Ah thank you; that makes sense. I plan on eventually getting into optical printing, but in the meantime I am using my school's film scanners.