Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,849   Posts: 1,582,856   Online: 745
      

View Poll Results: Do you take a backup shot?

Voters
61. You may not vote on this poll
  • Always. Better be sure than sorry.

    17 27.87%
  • Depends: if the scene is unrepeatable.

    38 62.30%
  • Are you crazy? a BW 4x5" sheet costs 1 Euro (and more)!

    1 1.64%
  • Never! Backups are for sissies and it doubles the number of scenes to photograph!

    5 8.20%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Backup sheets?

  1. #11
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    The nice thing about SBR numbers and tube development, one is really all that is needed for an exact shot, development and print. Once all variables are known and development is a routine, it just becomes a call about tweaking for effect. As I stated above, minimal agitation gives still another tool in development which can effect the outcome. Nice to have choices in the same shot for differing effects. tim

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    829
    Images
    7
    I've never shot a backup. There have been a few times where I wished I would have though. If I ever run across a "once in a lifetime" shot, I'm going to shoot a backup or two. So far that hasn't happened.

  3. #13
    Calamity Jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Manitoba Canada
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    159
    Images
    1
    I just learned the hard way to do backups and run them seperate from the primary shots. On a recent expedition, my developer was giving out on me toward the end of the trip and I had negatives for 3 customers come out too thin to do POP prints - I SHOULD have known better than to run all the films thru at the same time! Had I developed the primaries first, I would have seen the problem and saved myself a lot of work.

    Sortcuts are often not "short"!

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    653
    I double less and less these days with B&W, but still quite a bit with color so that I can try bleach bypass, or whatever.

    Interestingly, for the first few years of shooting LF, I doubled almost religiously, yet found that most of my keepers ended up being of scenes I'd only shot one negative of. It became a real head-scratcher for me and I finally realized that my bracketing was related to both the difficulty of a shot's set-up and of how hard I had to hunt for the picture -- the more conscious effort involved, the more likely I was to shoot doubles or more. Yet, it was the easy, intuitive stuff that often proved the most successful, and by "easy" I don't necessarily mean "obvious." I mean those shots which intuitively click inside and don't require a lot of conscious agonizing over lens choice, camera placement, etc...

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Calamity Jane
    I just learned the hard way to do backups and run them seperate from the primary shots. On a recent expedition, my developer was giving out on me toward the end of the trip and I had negatives for 3 customers come out too thin to do POP prints - I SHOULD have known better than to run all the films thru at the same time! Had I developed the primaries first, I would have seen the problem and saved myself a lot of work.

    Sortcuts are often not "short"!
    I read about that on LF.info
    It must have been a great experience to do those shows.

    G

  6. #16
    bobfowler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    New Jersey, Land of the Living Dead
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,440
    Images
    19
    I shoot back up sheets as the situation dictates. If I'm shooting for a client, damn right I do, but if I'm shooting for me, I usually shoot a back up sheet, but not always.
    Bob Fowler
    fowler@verizon.net
    Some people are like Slinkies. They're really good for nothing, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.

  7. #17
    jimgalli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tonopah Nevada
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,422
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    156
    Mostly no. About 80 / 20 I suppose. If I'm going to experiment with a new developer like Rodinal the other day then I do. On a recent trip I had the 717 set up for a really pretty shot and couldn't find the meter. I was using filters so guessing wasn't easy. I did 2 shots, the second with a full stop more exposure than the first. Developed the first and it was thin to the point of being completely un-useable. Knew I had a little more on the second but also knew I'd need a push. That one is still slightly thin but very printable.
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

    http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

  8. #18
    Bruce Osgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Brooklyn, N.Y. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,461
    Images
    47
    I've never shot a back up sheet until I read this thread. Now it is going to be a definite probably. I felt in the past that anything less than perfect did not warrant printing (I haven't done much printing recently), and why have two negatives showing the same errors?

    But after the APUG shoot in Asbury Park where I shot two different scenes from an empty film holder I realized it would only have been one wasted scene, not two, if I had shot the back up. Similar things happen to me and I think I probably will have more printable images if I shoot the same image on each film in the holder. Which is not a waste of film and does provide the opportunity to alter development, which is a 'god's send' for me.

    Thanks all for the enlightenment.

  9. #19
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    It never ceases to amaze me the number of ways I can mess up a shot. Luckily, I don't usually mess up twice in a row, so I usually take two shots and process one first. If that is OK, I might guestimate a new development time, or try a different developer to see what I get (still learning!).

    Cheers, Bob.

  10. #20
    Monophoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,691
    Images
    44
    It depends.

    I used to do it regularly to cover the risk of damage during processing. That was when I was processing in trays by shuffling - and the risk of scratching was high. When I switched to a slosher and recognized that the risk of scratching was essentially gone, I stopped making multiple exposures.

    Today I do it in two situations. One is where the scene is rapidly changing and I want to cover various aspects of that change. An obvious example is portraiture, but the situation could also present itself with something in nature if the wind is blowing, seascapes with waves breaking, etc.

    The other situation is where I expect that there could be a need to "play" with the processing, and need multiple negatives to experiment. Just yesterda, photographing a scene in my front yard, I made two negatives. One I processed normally (HC-110 H, 11 min with intermittent agitation) and the other was given stand processing (Rodinal, 1+100, 1 hour).

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