Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,548   Posts: 1,544,534   Online: 1017
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,240
    Images
    9

    Question for Jorge?

    When you metered this hall way
    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphot...t=last1&page=1

    Where did you place the meter to get the shadow detail?

    When metering really dark hallways I struggle with where to put the meter reading. I know everyone says meter where you want detail but when I do folks say it is too dark and they don't see enough detail. I can barely see anything right at camera left on your shot. Is there more in the print?

    I would have metered right there, Camera left, and placed the exposure on the least amount of detail shadow. Just under zone three.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  2. #2
    Loose Gravel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    921
    Images
    14
    If you are using large or even medium format and you think your shadows are too dark, give them more exposure. [Same with 35mm except you worry about grain.] Don't place something at under III if you want it to have detail. There might be some detail there with some films, but generally you aren't getting good separation or detail or local contrast until you get well above III. I know that I don't worry much about what is under III. I place my IVs in most scenes and let everything else fall where it may. In some unusually dark scenes, I check the IIIs and IIs, but not much.
    Watch for Loose Gravel

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    I use the BTZS, so the metering is done with an incident meter. Theorethically this averages the light in the dark zone and if you have done the testing you get the correct exposure for the dark tones.
    When I was using the ZS I found that placing the shadows with detail on zone III always resulted in underexposed negatives, I usually placed my dark zones with detail in zone IV and this seemed to work.
    The print has detail on the left side, you can clearly see the wall and the rock, but it goes to dark with no detail in the lower left and right hand corners.

    I would suggest you place your shadows in zone IV, it worked for me, it might work for you.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,240
    Images
    9
    thanks
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  5. #5
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,287
    Images
    20
    Mark--in that very tough neg you sent out in the print exchange (a dark hallway with a bright light coming through glass doors at the end), which I didn't get to print yet, if you were to meter for the shadows and place them on Zone III or IV, the highlight area would have been even more excessively dense at the development time you used. You probably would need to cut development time, give extra exposure, and perhaps adjust the development formula (as I recall it was BPF 200 in Pyrocat HD) or use stand development to keep the highlights in easily printable range.

    Whether you chose to place the shadows on zone III or IV depends in part on your film and other factors, like your personal EI for that film. If the film has a short toe, you might get good separation with the shadows on Zone III. If the film has a long toe, you might place the shadows on Zone IV, or alternately, you might decide that your Zone I density should be higher than 0.1 or in other words that you are going to reduce your working EI to lift the shadows off the toe. Placing the shadows on Zone IV, establishing Zone I density higher than 0.1 (and adjusting Zone VIII density by the same amount), or reducing your working EI are three different ways of thinking about the same thing--you're giving more exposure to move the whole range of densities up the curve.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    David makes a very good point, the exposure for this negative was done at an EI of 112 in tmx 400 and development was 3 minutes. So you have to take into account how much more you have expose if you plan to do N- development.

    This is why I like the BTZS much better, it just gives you all the info you need without any guessing.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Düsseldorf, Germany
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,021
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Jorge
    This is why I like the BTZS much better, it just gives you all the info you need without any guessing.
    I second that! No more fumbling or thinking....spend all your time composing!
    Francesco

  8. #8
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,179
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb
    Mark--in that very tough neg you sent out in the print exchange (a dark hallway with a bright light coming through glass doors at the end), which I didn't get to print yet, if you were to meter for the shadows and place them on Zone III or IV, the highlight area would have been even more excessively dense at the development time you used. You probably would need to cut development time, give extra exposure, and perhaps adjust the development formula (as I recall it was BPF 200 in Pyrocat HD) or use stand development to keep the highlights in easily printable range.
    There's no probably to it. The shadows on the left are effectively at Zone 0 and the highlights in the glass door panes are blown. Still, it might be possible to make a good print from it. I'll do my damnedest and send it back to you, David. I'm also going to send Mark a couple of my negatives which are virtually perfect (Zones III-1/2 to VIII with tone everywere) so he can get a better idea of what to shoot for. Their scale is perfectly matched to grade 2 Azo. One is done in Pyrocat HD and prints effortlessly.

    Mark - don't be afraid to put the darkest shadows on Zone IV. I know it seems like overkill, but the most glowing prints (on Azo, anyway - I can't comment on alternative processes) come from those negatives where "expose more, develop less" is the watchword.
    Jim

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,240
    Images
    9
    Just to clear things up I was not talking about that neg. I have another one that I printed, and a photo friend wanted to see more detail in the shadows. It was a very dark hall. I mean I could not see the outline of my camera. But, I understand what he means, I think. I walked down the hall with my meter and took an average from where I thought shadow detail would be most important. I guess I thought a really dark hallway should be made to look like a really dark hallway.

    As for the neg you guys have (now I am feeling bad about sending it out) I honestly did not think the highlights were blown. I can still see the black bars that are covering the door window. Sorry. If you all want, I have other negs that are better. I can ship one out and to replace it.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Mark,

    Another method of handling these high scene brightness ratio (high contrast) situations is through proportional exposure as opposed to reduction in development.

    Reduction in development will always lead to a compression of highlight values. Proportional exposure will maintain highlight tonal separation. I have a couple of images posted in the technical gallery that show the results obtainable with this process. This will work in situations where one would have SBRs of 11 or N-4.

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