Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,269   Posts: 1,534,426   Online: 959
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Paris
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    70
    Ok I developed the prints : I began with a bad frame which contrast was really low, but it was probably underexposed. Then I tried another two which were perfect. Seems like the processing is ok. Still have to get the exposure correct...I wonder if the problem isn't more the exposure. But I guess it's better to have no white spots (transparent spots) and high density rather than many white spots and low density...

    Edit : forgot to say that the two good prints were made at grade 2 and 3. I see it depends a lot on the light and exposure.

  2. #12
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Well more exposure tends to compress the shoulder and place more of the image higher up the curve. You don't need super dense negatives to get good prints but, and wholly dependent on subject matter, good exposure with adequate shadows always helps.

    If you're attempting to make APX look punchy and contrasty it simply isn't that kind of film. It's emphasis is on midtone tonality. Sure it can have some contrast but it won't be Tri-X or Neopan.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

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