Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,502   Posts: 1,571,725   Online: 960
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Miami, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    178

    Need opinion developing Tri-X / shot against the sun

    I shot beach rocks ocean landscape sunrise in backlighting @ F11. The light gray clouds under the sun metered @ 1/8000 and the dark rocks where the sun light was bating the top portion of the rocks measured at 1/500 , I decided to put those natually dark rocks on Zone 3 and reduced the exposure two zones to 1/2000 . then I figured I would develop n-1 to bring the bright sky down a bit. I shot at super wide 16mm angle so the sun in the picture is very small , bound to burn a little white hole but I dont care since it is small, and the reflection on the water is probably the same case but thats fine. But then I realized the shadow portion of those dark rocks are really way below the zone 3 . I never metered them... oh well my mistake. Should I develop at normal N. or since this is Tri-X 400 should I develop at N+1 to try salvage a bit of the low zones even though I know they will probably be pitch black... or should I stick with my original plan at N-1

    opinions. ? thx

  2. #2
    Terry Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    589
    Images
    17
    I would just compromise by developing normally. In either case, it sounds like you'll only be off by a stop or so, and should be able to dodge/burn what you need in printing.

  3. #3
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,793
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    N is what I'd use.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

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

  4. #4
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    I shoot into the sun a lot. I shoot two or three stops over then develop normally. I often use a #2 red filter too but be careful about lens flare re-reflecting off the filter unless you want that effect... which I sometimes do.

    Yes, you will likely end up with a silhouette but that's kinda' the point of shooting into the sun, anyway. Right?

    If I don't want a silhouette, I meter off a moderately bright spot on the sand or the ground near the subject. Problem is, you'll probably burn out the sky or most of it. Again, if that's what you want, go for it.

    In almost every case, I develop normally unless I have some other reason. Many times, it is possible to do some dodging and burning to get the silhouettes to have detail or to keep detail in the clouds. I'm not really good at doing more than basic dodges or burns so I usually just pick the part of the picture I like best and print for that.
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

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

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,014
    Considering the extreme that exist in your frame, I'm thinking it won't make an appreciable difference between N and N-1, or even N-2 as far as recovering extremes.

    If the rocks were WAY BELOW zone 3, there isn't much there to begin with.... I'd go with N.
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Castle Rock, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,466
    Images
    66
    Wow. What a question. apug rocks.
    “You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.” - John Galt

  7. #7
    Helinophoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    579
    Images
    20
    The reason, is that if you put the rocks in zone 3, this is the "last zone" you will retain shadow-details in.
    The sky is 4 stops brighter (zone 7), which is bright, but as you said; It was measured pretty close to the sun, it should naturally lie there, you should still be able to burn in things, need be.

    I use the advice in a book call simplified zone system. The basic advice there, is to measure the "darkest shadow-area you wish to retain shadow detail in" and shoot
    Later, when moving into more advanced stuff, it advice you to to as above, but check the brightest area you want details in and see how many stops there are between them. Zone 7 is the "brightest zone which still will retain detail").

    If your important sky highlights was zone 8 or 9, I would consider n-1 and n-2.
    -
    "Nice picture, you must have an amazing camera."
    Visit my photography blog at: http://helino-photo.blogspot.com



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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