Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,051   Posts: 1,561,177   Online: 859
      
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 26789101112
Results 111 to 120 of 120
  1. #111
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by Loose Gravel
    Wow, what a thread.

    When I'm out making a photograph shortly after sunset and the light is decaying, I often think that there must be a moment at which one could start an exposure that it would take all the light you could get (for the rest of the day) to complete the exposure. That is that because the light is decaying while I am exposing the film, my exposure needs to increase and by the time I've reached my predicted exposure, the light has faded more. Do you all think you can add this effect to your graphs?
    I don't think this could be easily modelled, as there are too many variables, including things you couldn't know, like sky conditions over the horizon after sunset. Heavy clouds over the horizon could kill the light faster than expected.

    Also, the sun sets at different angles at different latitudes at different times of the year. So the rate at which it drops below the horizon changes, which changes the length of twilight according to season and location.

    There are good working models of twilight, so you could do something with that, dependant on latitude and time of year, but I think combining that with unknown sky conditions over the horizon would be too complex and involve variables that the photographer couldn't observe in the field.

    Lee

  2. #112
    Murray@uptowngallery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Holland, MI
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    1,028
    Has anyone come up with tc,1 coefficients for additional films like color print, transparency and the multitude of other films that have appeared on the market in recent years?

    Thanks

    Murray
    Murray

  3. #113

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    EU, Greece
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3
    Hello all,

    That one must be my first post here but, I watch the forum for some time now.

    I have tried to gather as much info as i can and create a calculator for film reciprocity times...

    The programme is still under dev and might be unstable but you can get the general idea...

    I implemented the equation

    tr = tc,1*(tm^1.62) + tm

    where tc,1 coefficients are the following

    KODAK TMY T-MAX 400 ........0.061
    KODAK 400 TX TRI-X 400 ......0.169
    KODAK TMX T-MAX 100 ........0.069
    ILFORD HP5 Plus 400 ............0.101
    ILFORD 100 DELTA ...............0.046
    ILFORD Pan-F Plus 50 ...........0.140
    ILFORD FP4 Plus 125 ............0.110
    KODAK PLUS-X 125 ..............0.210
    KODAK Technical Pan ...........0.140
    ILFORD SFX 200 ..................0.450
    ILFORD XP2 Super 400 .........0.050
    KODAK T400 CN ..................0.030
    KODAK TMZ T-Max P3200 .....0.310

    for EFKE CHS ART I used ADOX suggestion:

    1/2s -> +0 stop
    1s -> +1/6 stop
    10s -> +1/3 stop
    100s-> +2/3 stop

    the general equation I used for that case is

    tr = tm + (tm * 2^log(tm)) / 6


    dev language C#.Net
    requires Microsoft Framework .Net 2
    win xp or later

    in order to upload the file I changed the extension to .pdf
    after you download the file just replace the .pdf part by .rar, unzip the file, paste both contained files in one folder and run the "film_reciprocity.exe" file

    if you think that it can help I might also develop it for mobile phones...

    I would appreciate any feedback

    If you have any additional equations for more films I will be glad to add them

    have fun...

    Christos
    Attached Files
    Last edited by celetron; 11-19-2009 at 10:05 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #114
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Christos,

    Whose reciprocity data did you use for each of the Kodak and Ilford films?

    Thanks,
    Lee

  5. #115

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    EU, Greece
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3
    Hello Lee,

    Actually I used the data you uploaded at GainerMethod.pdf.

    Regards

    Christos

  6. #116
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Christos,

    Thanks for the reply. The data from Reeves referenced in that post has been taken off the web, and that link in my post is dead. Reeves is no longer using film, and the test data from his page is about 10+ years old. The post of mine that you drew from is now almost 5 years old. So some of the films are likely to have changed a bit. TMY has been reformulated, although the few who have mentioned it say reciprocity is similar to the older version.

    Lee

  7. #117

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    EU, Greece
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee L View Post
    Christos,

    Thanks for the reply. The data from Reeves referenced in that post has been taken off the web, and that link in my post is dead. Reeves is no longer using film, and the test data from his page is about 10+ years old. The post of mine that you drew from is now almost 5 years old. So some of the films are likely to have changed a bit. TMY has been reformulated, although the few who have mentioned it say reciprocity is similar to the older version.

    Lee
    Quite possibly, but for the moment that is all the data I have. I guess I could run my own tests but it'll take ages... Maybe I should develop another version with the ability the users to add their own films and coefficients.

    regards

  8. #118
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by celetron View Post
    Quite possibly, but for the moment that is all the data I have.
    I'm not implying that there's better data around now, only that people who read this need to confirm or adjust through personal testing. If there is better data, I haven't seen it. And I'm disappointed that Reeves took down his color and B&W film information.

    Bond's methods were exhaustive. Reeves uses a rather short and simple test that I use. It's outlined in his and Michael Covington's books on film Astrophotography. (Be aware that the Covington book 2nd ed. has a typo that I found last year in one equation used to calculate reciprocity, so check his website for the errata page.) This method uses a 1/8 second exposure, then 128 second exposures under the same conditions but with a 10 stop neutral density filter and some bracketing. The amount of bracketing in stops that produces the same density at 128 seconds (with filter) as the 1/8 second exposure (without filter) is used to calculate a Schwarzschild exponent. This is a check at a single data point, but it's very good at giving a useful indication of the relative degree of reciprocity failure in a film. You could also use other ND filters of different values to get more data points, but 128 seconds is a good start.

    This testing takes only one reference frame and then however many bracketing shots you feel you need, at whatever step rate in stops would be useful to you. Four frames and reasonably careful work will give you a very good start.

    Lee

  9. #119

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Oregon and Austria
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    849
    Just an observation: I have the original Howard Bond article, "Black-and-White Reciprocity Departure Revisited," and in it, Bond states clearly that Kodak provided him with sheet film. Since 400TX does not come in sheets, he must have tested the 320TX, not the 400-speed-roll-film version that seems to be mentioned everywhere in the thread. Unfortunately, the usually careful Bond only identifies the film he tested as "Tri-X," with no other details. Since it was sheet film he was testing, however, we must assume that it was the 320 version and, therefore, revise all the earlier references to "400TX" in this thread to read "320TX."

    Nevertheless, this is a fine thread with much useful information.

    Best,

    Doremus Scudder

  10. #120

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    39
    Images
    34
    Interesting

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 26789101112


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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