Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,901   Posts: 1,584,522   Online: 1043
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 22 of 22
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Bucharest
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    ... So underexposure in low contrast weather can be as much as two stops to yield a normal negative. Over-exposure in extreme contrast can be as much as two or three stops, just to capture all that shadow detail.... Shoot a roll and bracket your exposures, see where you get 'enough' shadow detail to satisfy your taste. Then adjust developing time until the rest of the tonal range looks right.

    That is very good advice, regardless of the future choice of developer (does the underexposure/overdevlopment method need serious adjustments if working with Diafine ?). I'll probably have to sacrifice a couple of rolls to get things spot on, but I might start by rating film at 800, underexpose and develop it as for 1250 or 1600. Hopefully, that will give me medium contrast and medium detail in the shadows, as a starting point to tweak until satisfied. What I am dealing with is a mix of flat and low light , the latter due to weather and tall buildings bordering narrow streets. I need some detail in the shadows because the pavement is usually pretty dark in my city (wet asphalt) and people are typically wearing dark clothes. I'm rather tall, so I tend to tilt the camera downwards, and that makes the picture contain a lot dark areas, which I find not to be exactly eye-cathing. ( It might be useful to mention that I use a Sekonic L-208, and meter for a combination of light reflected from my hand and from pavement, which gives me a reasonable average, I think - slightly brighter human faces, making them stand out in the picture, and enough shadow detail, but by no means all possible detail )

    So far, a lot of people seem to recommend DD-X but I'm also tempted by Diafine, which is reported to produce good results. I still have to choose one and learn using it, before experimenting with the other.

  2. #22
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by theoria View Post
    I'll probably have to sacrifice a couple of rolls to get things spot on, ...
    A couple rolls will get you 60-80% of the way to being spot on. A couple dozen rolls may fine tune that to between 80-90%. The last few percentage points will take years.

    You'll have plenty of time to experiment with developers.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

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

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