Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,760   Posts: 1,516,015   Online: 927
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25
  1. #21
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,494
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by lns View Post
    Well, Tim and Athiril, I definitely lost detail in the highlights the other day when I overexposed a few shots of the new Portra 400, not in test shots but in actual photos. YMMV, and that's great news. Negative film has a lot of latitude. Of course it depends on the EV range in your photo, and how strong and contrasty the light is. If you are shooting in shade, or indoors in even light, it will be easier to over-expose with less effect. Good point. I do agree and should have been more detailed in my answer. But overexposure will be much more noticeable in strong sunlight, for example. And despite the nice latitude of negative film, it's not endless. There will be some effect, whether it shows up in every photo or not. So I will stand by my experience that if you overexpose two stops you will lose detail in the highlights.

    In fact, I consider the picture in post #13 to be very nicely exposed for the main subject, but also to have lost detail in the highlights where the sun strikes. So perhaps we just have different experiences or expectations. That's why I always learn so much on this forum.

    -Laura
    Sorry it hasn't lost detail at all, I think you need to recalibrate your monitor, and if you're not on a calibrated monitor but a typical low quality LCD (especially the ones Apple ships) then such a judegement can't be made by a visual inspection. And your exposure must have off +5 or more stops to begin with before overexposing those 2 stops. Or you simply do not understand image reproduction from a negative. I overexpoed Portra 400 in the sun +5 stops, the brightest highlights have detail in them.

    IE: The following is +5 stops, there isn't anything on there in the real scene that had contrast that doesnt have contrast on the negative (no contrast = no detail/blow out/burned out etc), comes a point where you got to decide what shall be black and what shall be white on your neg though. The detail isn't lost at +5 in direct hard Aussie sun, it certainly isn't lost at +2. That is a problem with your workflow and not the materials (New Portra 400).


    OCAU Melb Photowalk Week 2 #11 by athiril, on Flickr
    Last edited by Athiril; 03-09-2011 at 07:49 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #22
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,580
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    comes a point where you got to decide what shall be black and what shall be white on your neg though. The detail isn't lost at +5 in direct hard Aussie sun, it certainly isn't lost at +2. That is a problem with your workflow and not the materials (New Portra 400).
    Exactly.

    True for old Portra too.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    82
    The key question is: does your scanner allow the adjustment of exposure time to handle the dense negs? It is not only a problem of S/N ratio (although a good S/N does not hurt in such a case), but at "normal" exposure the highlight areas in the negative appear almost black to the scanner's CCD, which means noise and flat gradiation (and compensating the "flat" highlights in post-processing will introduce even more noise and visible posterization).
    Actually, a lot of complaints about "grain" in scanned negatives simply mean scanner noise.
    Sadly, most of the electronic garbage that is actually sold as "film scanners" (Reflecta/Pacific, Quato/Plustek...) only has a fixed exposure time (=scan speed) and cannot handle overexposed / overdeveloped negatives very well.

    Georg

  4. #24
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,494
    Images
    28
    They dont appear almost black on negs.

    Not an APUG issue, but VueScan allows exposure to be adjusted even on many flatbeds, but you dont need to do that, the regular exposure with Epson Scan or whatever makers software captures the entire histogram of negs, you just got to expand the levels to include it all.

    Plustek dedicated scanners are terrific quality.

  5. #25
    DanielStone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,940
    Images
    1
    I shot this at ISO 160, but there's still printable(in the darkroom) detail on the brightest highlights. I scanned this on the Imacon at school, but that scanner can't handle +4 or +5 highlight detail, even with a 3F scan.

    Also, this was shot on a 220 roll(in the RZ I have for sale here), so fine details in hightlights or shadows will resolve better than on 35mm, primarily due to more "meat" of a negative(surface area)

    http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/y..._2010_0913.jpg

    -Dan

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