Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,208   Posts: 1,531,921   Online: 1132
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30
  1. #21
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    If I have time to meter everything properly, I use box speed. When using sunny 16/guess exposure, I use 125 and 250 on cameras with the international shutter speed increments, and 100 and 200 on cameras with the older increments. A little overexposure won't hurt, and sunny 16 is not about being exact. It is about getting a usable shot without wasting time metering. Unlike some, I do not believe that down rating all the time makes for a better negative. If testing has indicated that with the lab I am using, upon normal printing, tones are not reliably falling where I believe that they should, then I will always re rate that film. For example, I do this with Fuji Pro 400H, which I rate at 500 to get the shadows to print the way I like. I use an incident meter or a spot meter; not an in-camera reflected meter. I believe that much of the recommendation to always down rate comes from people who simply do not know how to (or don't take the time to) meter well, and always use their in-camera reflected meter.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 09-26-2009 at 07:13 PM. 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
    brucemuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Metro DC area, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,265
    Images
    4
    should have said printing exposure

    thanks PE

  3. #23
    brucemuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Metro DC area, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,265
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    I believe that much of the recommendation to always down rate comes from people who simply do not know how to meter well, and always use their in-camera reflected meter.
    Well not everyone is shooting stuff that allows for a slow, careful analysis of the entire scene.

    I usually downrate based on my prior experiences and to at least hopefully ensure good shadow detail with neg films if I'm shooting on the run.

  4. #24
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by brucemuir View Post
    Well not everyone is shooting stuff that allows for a slow, careful analysis of the entire scene.

    I usually downrate based on my prior experiences and to at least hopefully ensure good shadow detail with neg films if I'm shooting on the run.
    That is why I used the phrases "much of" and "always down rate". Many people say to just do it across the board, all the time, with every film, because it simply gives better results in every way, every time. What you describe is exactly the reason that I stated I down rate as well, when I do.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 09-26-2009 at 07:18 PM. 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)

  5. #25
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    Actually, my habitual downrating of color neg started about the time when we converted from ASA to ISO. It was a time when many films were off by about 1/10th of a stop to 1/3 of a stop. Fuji color neg was a full 1/2 stop slow IIRC and to boot, the 3 layers were not balanced for daylight. It was 1/3 stop slow if the color balance was adjusted in printing.

    In any event, I learned to use that 1/3 stop to advantage and have kept on doing it in my non-DX cameras. In my DX cameras, I let the camera set the ISO rating. I recently exposed some Portra 800 at 400 by accident and the results were just fine. I had left an old tab on the camera back for Portra 400. My bad! I had forgotten what I put into the camera due to old age.

    PE

  6. #26
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,739
    I never quite understood Ron, why ASA was changed to ISO, they seem to me to be the same, or Isn't that the case ?
    Ben

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    ASA was changed to ISO to get rid of the different rating systems that existed, and replace it with one.

    The most well-known rating system that fell victim to this was DIN. ASA 100, DIN 21 should be marked as ISO 100/21. But the DIN part fell off very soon.

  8. #28
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    The change was also undertaken to get ISO certification in the photo industry for speeds, color balances, chemical purity, nomenclature and chemical handling, etc.... Kodak was up to ISO 900x certification at the plant for its various projects. It was rather wide sweeping and now includes image stability and testing methods.

    PE

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    ISO 9000 certification is quite another matter though.

    It is not about setting industry standards, but about allowing a company to define what it thinks constitutes quality; let that company record those thoughts about what they themselves think they should do, in protocols that should be adhered to; and then audit their operation to see if they do indeed adhere to their own self-defined quality standards.
    And if they do, they get an ISO 9000 mark of approval.
    A marketing tool. Nothing more.

  10. #30
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    Well, it is more than that. Kodak was able to use this with suppliers and environmentalists to show their needs and compliance with certain laws. They could show Lead and Mercury emissions and give a supplier their requirements for photo grade chemicals. It also let the industry see what Kodak was doing and using.

    PE

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