Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,956   Posts: 1,522,904   Online: 1169
      
Page 8 of 23 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112131418 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 228
  1. #71
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,218
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    I have come to belive that true-underexposures are almost always caused by "us". It is caused by outright mistakes in setting the camera, poor metering technique, a lack of understanding of what the meter is saying, and or in trying to cheat to avoid camera support or flash when it is clearly needed.

    "We" are the wild card, not the film. I think it is actually almost impossible to get an underexposure caused by the film ISO rating. Ilford, Kodak, and Fuji are very good at their jobs, their films are well made and consistent and as best I can tell work extremely well and deliver exactly what they advertise.
    Mark, that is why I suggest using the ISO speed as a starting point to determine the photographer's personal EI. Most pop testing methods have too many questionable elements that any true accuracy is impossible. All that they can really offer is a way to determine a personal EI. This is what most photographers really need, which is fine if they understand this. What I find troubling is when photographers question the legitimacy of the ISO standards based only on an understanding of a questionable "pop" methodology.

    Since obtaining a personal EI is the goal for most photographers, why then waste the time with a convoluted testing method. Shoot some negative as determine how you tend to exposure. But first, determine your processing.

  2. #72

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,537
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    So where does Delta 3200 fall short? Our expectations or Ilford's info?
    Probably a little of both (concerns all "super-speed" films). My understanding is in the case of say Delta 3200 and TMax 3200 these are not ISO speeds.

  3. #73
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    Probably a little of both (concerns all "super-speed" films). My understanding is in the case of say Delta 3200 and TMax 3200 these are not ISO speeds.
    Great example on how understanding theory is beneficial to understanding the process. Nowhere does it say ISO with these films, which means they haven't been tested according to the ISO standards. The "P" in P3200 stands for process.

  4. #74
    AndreasT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    Great example on how understanding theory is beneficial to understanding the process. Nowhere does it say ISO with these films, which means they haven't been tested according to the ISO standards. The "P" in P3200 stands for process.
    But most do not this.
    Testing or taking photo with film and checking the negative surely comes down to the same thing at the end of the day.

  5. #75
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Ilford's data on Delta 3200 shows an ISO if 1000.

    http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/201071394723115.pdf

    For Kodak this was copied from tech pub f32

    EXPOSURE
    KODAK T-MAX P3200 Professional Film is specially designed to be used as a multi-speed film. The speed you use depends on your application; make tests to determine the appropriate speed.
    The nominal speed is EI 1000 when the film is processed in KODAK T-MAX Developer or KODAK T-MAX RS Developer and Replenisher, or EI 800 when it is processed in other Kodak black-and-white developers. It was determined in a manner published in ISO standards. For ease in calculating exposure and for consistency with the commonly used scale of film-speed numbers, the nominal speed has been rounded to EI 800.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  6. #76
    AndreasT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    352
    Everybody I know in my small world exposes these film at 3200. None of them have ever read the data sheets

  7. #77
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by AndreasT View Post
    Everybody I know in my small world exposes these film at 3200. None of them have ever read the data sheets
    Sadly, I agree that ignorance of reality is the norm.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  8. #78
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,218
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    Sadly, I agree that ignorance of reality is the norm.
    And we should struggle to correct that, not make excuses for its continuation.

  9. #79
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    And we should struggle to correct that, not make excuses for its continuation.
    Absolutely!
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,537
    Agree 100%. In fact, in additon to the specific tech publications/instructions for specific materials, both Kodak and Ilford have a variety of very good papers available on their websites about testing, process control, negative contrast, printing etc. I often direct people to these in threads but Ilford and Kodak usually get drowned out!

    Actually given a few other recent threads I'm thinking of posting a thread with links to all these documents. They are excellent resources for people starting out.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin