Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,550   Posts: 1,544,699   Online: 909
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Filter Factors

  1. #11
    lee
    lee is offline
    lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth TX
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,913
    Images
    8
    HI Ed,
    I agree that the light meter is just one step in the exposure chain. I tend to error in the + area anyway for black and white film.

    lee

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,966
    Images
    1
    </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Les McLean @ Jan 6 2003, 10:27 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>A few years ago I spent a couple of hours and a couple of rolls of 120 film testing my filters to determine my own factor...</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
    simple but practicle Will try this soon.. thanks for the tip&#33;

  3. #13
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    ..

  4. #14
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    ..

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    Hey Aggie great help....so it does work? have you found out any gross errors? like say your negative was underpoxed by 1 or 2 stops, or does the system work close enough. I mean 1 stop to 1/2 stop error, who cares....but 2 stops would have me worried.

    BTW I can tell you that the B+W filter factors are very unreliable. These are the filters I have and they consistently underxposed the image. I hate that, I rather overexpose and work in the darkroom than have that morass (emphasis on the last syllable) of featureless black.....




  6. #16
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    ..

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    The problem that I have discovered for myself is that the meters as they are manufactured do not see in the same way that panchromatic film does. In fact they will tend to give evergreen (pine) tree foliage too little exposure. The reason is that the evergreen foliage radiates a great deal of IR radiation. The meter sees it but the film does not. At the other end of the extreme these same meters will tend to give red too great exposure. Which is all good once we determine that is what is happening. For instance if one were to place the aforementioned green foliage at a zone III placement with even a brand new meter the negative and consequently the print will be more akin to a I 2/3 placement. The modification that Zone VI did to the Pentax meters went a long way to solving this problem through the use of sharp cutting filters as well as UV and IR filters and baffling. I have used several meters over the years and have found nothing aside from the modified meters that sees light in the same way as the film does. For that reason if one were to meter through filters with a unmodified meter the result would probably not be as accurate as one would hope. This has all been verified in my experience.
    Art is a step from what is obvious and well-known toward what is arcane and concealed.

    Visit my website at http://www.donaldmillerphotography.com

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    dn that is my feeling also, I think I am just going to go with Les&#39;s test. At &#036;5 a shot for a 12x20 I cant be fooling around with " close but no cigar" methods.

  9. #19
    dr bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Annapolis, Md
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    871
    Images
    14
    Many of my photographs require no filters but when I have had to use them I have found that my equipment (mainly a Mamiya C330f and a Speed Graphic) with TX, or HP5 (both rated at ISO 200) require at least one more stop increase than those listed in the Gordon Hutchings listings. Also, they do not seem to agree with the classical listings in general.

    Anyone know what equipment and procedures were used by Hutchings in composing this listing?

    There&#39;s nothing so satisfying as personal testing, providing you don&#39;t let it take over your life.

    Truly, dr bob.
    I love the smell of fixer in the morning. It smells like...creativity!
    Truly, dr bob.

  10. #20
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    ..

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