Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,553   Posts: 1,544,985   Online: 683
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23
  1. #11
    wildbill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,416
    Images
    140
    OMG!
    www.vinnywalsh.com

    I know what I want but I just don't know how to go about gettin' it.-Hendrix

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,957
    Normal development the result will likely be better than if you shot at 400.

  3. #13
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Chan Tran View Post
    Normal development the result will likely be better than if you shot at 400.
    i would not go that far. I have found that box speed give the best results because the exposure range is balanced around it. Most of the testing for the elusive EI is based on the result that the camera, lens, light meter or darkroom technique are not properly calibrated. Typically people shooting at half the box speed are merely compensating for aiming the light meter to include too much of the sky. It is much easier to blame problems on the film manufacturers than accept that they are systematically making the same mistake or that the camera and/or the light meter is not properly calibrated.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ash, Kent
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    130
    Images
    25

    Natalia on Portra 400 by The Paul Reid, on Flickr

    This is after editing. It came out fine. A bit highlight heavy for my tastes but managed to bring back some mid tones. Good to know I can save myself from stupidity sometimes

    Thanks for the info guys!
    Speed Graphic, Pentax 67, Mamiya RZ67, Mamiya 645 1000s, Nikon F5, Nikon Fm2

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    826
    Of course overexposure can also come from scans. I know the minilab types typically do and depending on the operator, you may not have an option.

    Lovely image! Great job!

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn NY
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    25
    Joel Sternfeld always told our class to rate Portra at half the box speed, which meant in most cases running Portra 160NC at 80 and you'd BETTER use a tripod ("90% of the 'look' of art photography is the tripod.") His reasoning was that Kodak always over-rated their film, but this probably isn't really the case anymore. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the "look" of his work is due to consistently squashing the highlights in exposure.

    I also recall overhearing a conversation where he was telling somebody that if they needed to do handheld available light, they should try using iso 800, shooting it 400, and pushing it two stops. Hahahaha.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    My advise to the OP would have been about the same as everybody elses'. Just develop normally and be glad the film tolerated it. I do not agree with "Joel Sternfield" or any other teacher/know-it-all personalities claiming that they know better than the scientists at the film company who work very diligently to R & D their product. I guess I'm too old to be fooled anymore by some "expert" that claims to know better than Kodak.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    129
    Looks great!

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,601
    Joel Sternfeld was one of those 70's types who was revolting from the saturated look of color by abusing color neg film for abnormally muddy tones; he did this in an interesting manner. But the published box speed is indeed the correct location of first base relative to what the film
    is engineered to do. How you bend the rules after that is up to you. Just remember that, in this respect, Portra is a lot more forgiving than Ektar will be.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    It wasn't my intent to diminish this Sternfield fellow's classes or students. Perhaps I have a sensitivity to teachers and professors who sop up a paycheck teaching gobbledegook. My brother-in-law is a retired professor who managed to make quite a nestegg for himself teaching absolute boloney that not a soul in this world needed to know. It taints my attitude towards some of these "scholars" who bloat college budgets and tuition costs with make-work absurdity.
    And then I think of a guy like PE who dedicated his career as a scientist at the film company whose job it was to print a reliable box speed on the product, then hold quality-control to that standard. So, between the 2, I'd say Kodak is more reliable than some subjective relativist egghead like my brother-in-law.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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