Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,499   Posts: 1,543,228   Online: 1052
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    It sounds like overdevelopment, perhaps coupled with underexposure, is causing the difficulties with printing. 400 films tend be be inherently lower in contrast (hence higher in latitude) than slower films, so I doubt the film is the root of the problem. It is lighting and development IMO. Plus, if you are using an in-camera relected meter, they tend to underexpose in bright compositions, if read directly. I'd try incident metering if you are using an in-camera meter now. Then, if the lighting is higher than normal in contrast, I'd try to overexpose/underdevelop a bit more than you are doing. Maybe one stop instead of 1/3 stop, to start.

    This is assuming that you want a 400 film for it's D of F and stop-motion abilities. If not, I'd go for a 100 or 125 speed film. Yes, Acros is a great one, and very affordable...though I wouldn't say it is much more forgiving than T-Max or Delta. Any film will need to be brought under control by way of testing for best results.
    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. #12
    ROL
    ROL is offline
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    794
    Sorry to harsh your buds, but I think you're headed down a dead end road here in attempting to solve ambient high contrast lighting conditions with any particular film. As previously eluded to by others, you would do well to look at the (a) Zone System of exposure/printing.

    I have used all these films with success by my reckoning (though I don't prefer Acros for other reasons), in all kinds of high (and low) contrast natural lighting. Pan F is a very contrasty film by nature, unless used thoughtfully and developed accordingly with regard to specific lighting conditions. How is a film with a lot of built in contrast going to ameliorate your high contrast exposures? Appreciating and recognizing good light is as fundamental, particularly in monochrome, as is composing. No "tricks" are necessary, just proper technique. Look to the light, man. Learn how to tame it, and any film will likely be suitable.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,052
    Contrast can be a real issue on bright day. You need a film that handles that well. The ISO 400 films handle contrast well, but that speed is not needed on a bright day. The ISO 100 class films has sufficient speed even for hand held photography on a good day, and they have finer grain and greater sharpness as well. There is a lot of choice in this group, and the decision depends on what look you like.

  4. #14
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,218
    It's all about processing. It's not about one film being inherently more contrasty than another. Contrast is contrast. Process two different film types to the identical Contrast Index and they are practically the same. Proper processing is about matching the scene to the paper.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    62
    Blog Entries
    2
    I lived in Colorado Springs for some 4 years or so. I haven;t been shooting for long, but loved the colors I got with Fuji Velvia 100. Here's a link to some of my photos I took with this film and a Pentax MV1 35mm.

    http://blog.freewayfoto.com/archives/3181

  6. #16
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,216
    I'd use T-max 400. My own experience agrees with the curves published by Kodak. That is, T-max 100 ,when over developed can produce over-dense highlights. See the curves for T-max 100 at 10 and 12 minutes in the PDF. Compare to T-max 400. http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...4016/f4016.pdf

    T-max 100 below:


    T-max 400 below:

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