HI y'all - I just finished a bit of triage on an old Press Graflex and made a first exposure. I would like to flip it from a positive to a negative so that I can get a gross reading on how close the shutter speeds are. Could someone flip this neg for me and repost? I would be much obliged.
Hmm, I am inclined to say it looks pretty good (in a negative taped to the monitor and shot with a digicam sort of way). What do you think? Could use maybe a trifle more exposure / less development? The porch is in complete shadow and the subject is full sun.
Well, to my mind, the face and fleshtones are the thing, and in this fairly awful "scan", they seem quite good to me - nice tonal range, not too contrasty - and even though the porch is in shadow, there's still tone there too. Isn't large format lovely...
I would like to flip it from a positive to a negative so that I can get a gross reading on how close the shutter speeds are.
You are better off just looking at the shadows on your negative. The denser values are going to be affected by your development as much as the exposure, so don't look there.
In your negative, as posted, the negative is clear where you would probably like to see some detail. For example under the neck, the eye sockets and the pants are all clear and this indicates not enough exposure. I do agree that it is underexposed, but when you check a negative for exposure, be sure to look in the right places and the negative is your best indicator.
Leaf shutters in general run slow, especially old ones [and this would produce over exposure]. I suspect your under exposure is from not rating the film optimally. Half the ISO for your exposure index and repeat. I'll bet the results will be better.
Sorry ic-racer, I should have been more clear. The camera in question is a Press Graflex, which is a focal plane shutter-only SLR. There is no leaf shutter capability. The FP shutter was just installed and tensioned by eye, so the real goal of the test was to estimate the degree of shutter speed adjustment required, as opposed to dialing in my personal EI for an emulsion using a shutter of known good speeds. So in this case I would be relaxing the tension a bit on the shutter rather than changing ISO ratings. I was asking for the flip so I could do a bit of rangefinding on the whole system, not just shadow density. So by way of the thin shadows I see that I am running a bit fast on speeds, and by way of the highlights (in the flip) I see that I will need to dial back my development on the next test or the highlights may get a bit toasty.
I suppose old shutters of any stripe, leaf or FP, would tend to run slow, but this is not an "old" shutter in the sense that it has been cleaned and lubed thoroughly within the last few weeks. Hope that adds a bit of meat to them bones!
Thanks as always for the insights,
Jon
Originally Posted by ic-racer
You are better off just looking at the shadows on your negative. The denser values are going to be affected by your development as much as the exposure, so don't look there.
In your negative, as posted, the negative is clear where you would probably like to see some detail. For example under the neck, the eye sockets and the pants are all clear and this indicates not enough exposure. I do agree that it is underexposed, but when you check a negative for exposure, be sure to look in the right places and the negative is your best indicator.
Leaf shutters in general run slow, especially old ones [and this would produce over exposure]. I suspect your under exposure is from not rating the film optimally. Half the ISO for your exposure index and repeat. I'll bet the results will be better.
Sorry, I disagree. The exposure is just about right for the main subject. The fact that the eye sockets are very dark is because of the hard directional light. You can see it on the right side of the subject's face. Light is direct from the subjects left with no softening at all. Fix that with a little bit of fill flash. As little as 1/2 to 1 stop extra light from a strobe makes all the difference in the world and doesn't look too obvious. Experiment a little with smaller and cheaper formats to learn just how much extra pop you need to soften up those heavily shaded areas. Don't over do it, and the effect is not obvious.
Adv Reply
Originally Posted by munz6869
