Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,533   Posts: 1,572,670   Online: 868
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    I disagree too.

    When I first heard about finding your true film speed, etc, I did a lot of research and almost every article I read which documented a lot of tedious testing of multiple frames at various exposures and then developing for varying times came to the conclusion that halving the box speed and reducing development was the best method.

    I could have replicated these tests for myself but I chose not too. Instead I shot a roll of HP5+ at EI 200, gave it 75% of normal development and printed some pictures.

    I decided that I liked it and have carried on this way ever since. The only time I use HP5+ at ISO 400 is on quite dull days.


    Steve.
    From my first post in the thread:

    "If you find this opens up your shadows to a tone that you like, have at it, but you might want to experiment with 15 to 25 percent underdevelopment to tame the high end if you are shooting in contrasty light."

    I agree that half rating, average exposing, *followed by underdeveloping* can cover many standard photographic situations situations quite well. I also think it could make many other standard photographic situations quite harder to print than they need to be. You (as in Steve Smith; not the proverbial "You") do the "thinking" thing by basing your exposure and development on the conditions at hand. That is *not* blindly following a rule of thumb.

    However, different folks will get different results, and also will *judge* results differently. Thus I think each of us has to do our own trial and error, and also accurately and honestly judge our results. No matter what any of us do, we are never going to always get ideal exposures by following rules of thumb. Via trial and error; YES. But not via rules of thumb followed blindly.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 04-03-2009 at 07:12 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  2. #22
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    From my first post in the thread:

    "If you find this opens up your shadows to a tone that you like, have at it, but you might want to experiment with 15 to 25 percent underdevelopment to tame the high end if you are shooting in contrasty light."

    I agree that half rating, average exposing, *followed by underdeveloping* can cover many standard photographic situations situations quite well. I also think it could make many other standard photographic situations quite harder to print than they need to be. You do the "thinking" thing by basing your exposure and development on the conditions at hand. That is *not* blindly following a rule of thumb.

    However, different folks will get different results, and also will *judge* results differently. Thus I think each of us has to do our own trial and error, and also accurately and honestly judge our results. No matter what any of us do, we are never going to get ideal exposures by following rules of thumb. Via trial and error; YES. But not via rules of thumb followed blindly.
    **********
    I agree with this completely. I want a negtive that contains the information I need to accomplish the print I must use to convey the thought/feeling/attitude I experienced at the time I released the shutter.
    Actually "seeing" the light; then intuitively knowing what must be done to convey the "message" the light is writing to me (and my eventual viewer) is what, to me, Edward Weston meant by the term "seeing photographically."
    By using the basic approach of getting the shadows on the film; and keeping the highlights on the print one develops(sorry about that, chief) a criterion, a basis, a foundation, upon which my photographic judgments are based.
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  3. #23
    white.elephant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    197
    This discussion and the back-and-forth is why APUG is so valuable to me. Not that I blindly follow any rule of thumb, but rather that I now have a better idea what the variables are for my own experimentation. This is just a post of gratitude for all your insight. opinions, and wisdom.
    Chris Klug
    -----------
    My photo life story: http://patternsoflightndark.com/wordpress/

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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