Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,679   Posts: 1,482,185   Online: 1058
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,242
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    How reliable is the "reading a newspaper through a negative" theory? I have plenty of negatives that print great but I cannot read a newspaper through them.
    Last edited by brian steinberger; 05-08-2011 at 09:54 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,522
    I came into the possession of several 8x10 glass plate negatives circa 1930. What immediately struck me was how thin they appeared yet they produce beautiful prints. You can easily read a newspaper through them. Years ago photographers tried to produce the thinnest possible negatives that still had good shadow detail. Remember papers at that time were very slow. Excess density only contributes to increased graininess.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  3. #13
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,242
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    Years ago photographers tried to produce the thinnest possible negatives that still had good shadow detail.
    Is this still the case?

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Baltimore
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    133
    It surely depends on your own way of printing combined with your initial and final visions for your print. I find the one mistake I make more often than any other is overdevelopment. So, when I see a negative I look first and foremost for highlights that are not too strong. If this is the case, I usually have no trouble with the print.

  5. #15
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,242
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    I guess the problem I have is viewing a negative on the light table vs. against a white piece of paper. My negatives look great on the light table but against a white piece of paper on a table they look very dense overall, but do print ok. Maybe I should try cutting my development time back a bit, 10%.

  6. #16
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by VladimirC View Post
    Sorry for spamming the forum.

    I am searching for some examples of how negatives look, in cases of overexposure, underexposure, underdevelopment... and so on.

    I searched, found some things, but nothing satisfactory. Pretty hard to find it as digital image and be accurate (logical why) but if you have any quick resources on this I would appreciate.
    You'll see examples in any basic photo textbook. There should be several at your nearest library or book store.
    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)

  7. #17
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by brian steinberger View Post
    Is this still the case?
    Not so much. Our films can handle overexposure much better (i.e without getting super grainy and having the tonality significantly tweaked), and many people now advocate overexposing negatives as a matter of course. I am not one of them, but I understand the technical and artistic reasons behind the practice, and in some situations, I will overexpose a lot in order to get what I want. But generally, I prefer not to load a negative with density and detail that I do not plan on using.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 05-09-2011 at 12:08 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)

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pasadena, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    813
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    You'll see examples in any basic photo textbook. There should be several at your nearest library or book store.
    Replies #6 and 10 have some example links.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,522
    Having a thin negative is still inportant for 35mm photography where the high degree of enlargement emphasizes grain.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

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