Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,721   Posts: 1,514,948   Online: 1115
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    309

    Underexposed 160VC by 1 stop

    I am sure this has been discussed before. But I have spent 20 minutes in searching the archive without much luck in finding what I am looking for. Hope this is not too bad to ask again.

    I accidentally shot a 220 roll of 160VC with the camera set to 320 ISO. So the entire roll was underexposed by 1 stop. I can push process this roll with my Jobo processor by extending the development time to 3 minutes 45 seconds. My questions is what I should expect the images to come out. Will I get weird color balance? Will the film grain be OK still?

    The roll was shot during my day trip yesterday to the Pinnacles Monument National Park in California. It was a bright sunny day yesterday but the sun wasn't like summer days. It was really perfect for scenery shots. Unfortunately I found out that the ISO setting was at ISO 320 when I finished the roll. I know if I process it as usual the images will be grainy and poor colors as well.

    I hope I can still get reasonable fine shots by pushing it one stop in processing. Your comments will be appreciated.

  2. #2
    mts
    mts is offline
    mts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    332
    Images
    95
    In my experience pushing C-41 does not usually work very well, but you should be able to get ~1/2 stop without any difficulty and the film latitude will likely carry you through the other half-stop. You will probably notice the mistake most in shadows that will be lacking detail. Highlights will be somewhat lower on the characteristic curve and mid-tones will probably be ok as well. All you can really do is process the film and see how it comes out. If the pictures are really valuable then expose frames from another roll the same way and with normal settings and process it as a test. The Macbeth chart is a good target for such testing. I have not had cross-over problems when pushing C-41 by 50%, so you should be ok on color balance. I think you might want to process a test roll at 4 min. or even 4-1/2 minutes figuring that processing less time will be somewhere in between normal and a maximum push. Post some results and let us know how things work out.
    By denying the facts, any paradox can be sustained--Galileo

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    I've only ever pushed C-41 film once. And I didn't develop it. It was expired Gold 100 which I accidentally shot at 400. Whoops. Sent it off and the negs came back useable (for scanning). I actually kind of liked them.

    If you have a Jobo at home, why not push it? I do know that sometimes with color film, if you actually underexpose a full stop, you might want more than a +1 push (3:45).

  4. #4
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    Push it a stop and see what you get. What other choice do you have, really?
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  5. #5
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,577
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Kodak actually claims a latitude of -2 to +3 stops with no change to the processing.

    You will have less shadow detail than you would have, but they should probably be just fine otherwise.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    NYC Tri-State Area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    17
    Once I accidently ran through a roll of Portra 160NC (35mm) with the meter set at 400. I had it pushed 1.5 stops at the lab and it turned out fine. I even printed a few frames from that roll in the darkroom on 11 x 14 paper.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    309
    Many thanks to the input to this thread, everyone. I feel very hopeful now. I will push process the roll 1 stop and see how it comes out. I kept on forgetting to check my camera's ISO setting. I believe I had a roll of 160NC shot at ISO 320 before. I did not push it and it came out much too thin in density. The images were grainy. This time it is a 160VC. I am not going to take chances. I will push it 1 stop this time.

  8. #8
    rphenning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    341
    I used to underexpose vc by a stop. Looking back at the negatives I am really not into the color casts it produced. Id much rather overexpose by a stop now. Anyways.

  9. #9
    rphenning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    341
    that's without pushing it though, I developed it at 160 so you may be fine.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    309
    Thanks a lot for everyone's input. I finally developed my underexposed 160VC with 1 stop push. I am completely blown off to discover that this film is not suitable for push processing even by only one stop. The most obvious is that the shadow basically has nothing but deep black there. It makes my images way too contrasty. Besides, the colors are off a bit too. This may be the effect of being too contrasty. The images are still usable although they are difficult to scan now. By looking at the histogram the underexposure (by 1 stop) effect is clearly visible. I have to conclude that 160VC better not not be pushed. This may apply to most if not all negative films too. I will probably shoot this film next time with ISO 100 set in my camera.

    I developed this underexposed 160VC 220 with 850 ml Kodak C-41 developer for 3 minutes 45 seconds. Judging from the result I don't believe longer development time would have made it better. I will find out how to post a sample image next.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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