Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,218   Posts: 1,532,207   Online: 927
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,019

    Underexposed Ultramax 400

    I think I kind of know the answer to this question ("don't worry about it"), but the lighting wasn't very good so I thought I'd ask.

    We rented a cabin Hocking Hills, Ohio, and on an hike my best friend accidentally exposed Ultramax 400 with the camera set to 800. I know one stop isn't a big deal, but we were in a forest with a nice canopy, on a mostly cloudy day, so the lighting was very flat. The pictures were of a dry waterfall with small relief caves in the rock face.
    Here is a link to a photo of the "subject" from the cabin-owners flickr stream, in case it helps:
    http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2703/4...b04_z.jpg?zz=1
    Unlike the above photo, there is more cover since it is June and thus the deciduous trees have leaves (plus it's an old photo, so more has grown).

    I'm not quite ready to do C-41 myself and she wants the photos soon (I'm stockpiling my film for when I do C-41). We'll use a local printer that will push and pull in one-stop increments. We don't do walmart, and the printer's prices aren't that far from Walgreen's and CVS - with far better quality.
    The photos aren't that important (if they were, we'd have used different film), but my friend would like viewable prints.

    So, considering the lighting, "one stop push" or "don't worry about it?"
    Truzi

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    1 stop push--my vote.fwiw

  3. #3
    mablo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    375
    Ultramax 400 is a beautiful film but it's really just barely 400 speed. EI200 is much more like it IMO. In flat light I'd definitely push it one stop.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,951
    there isn't much latitude in the underexposure side so I say push it 1 stop.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,606
    Truzi, if the subject contrast was low AND you can tolerate increased graininess, I suppose generally speaking some amount of extra development would help save whatever shadow detail the film recorded. There are always subjective preferences involved here.

  6. #6
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,019
    I explained the contrast and grain issue to my friend, which she understands and is okay with. She did take issue with how stops are "numbered," though (400 to 800 is "only" 1 stop?). She can work the numbers (shutter and aperture), but I can't explain _why_ things are numbered that way (it involves some math, which is my great failing).
    Unfortunately, my explanations use bad analogies and probably makes things worse. To make a bad analogy about my analogies, it's like using cosine to explain sine - if you don't understand one, it can't be used to illustrate the other.
    Truzi

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    618
    Quote Originally Posted by Truzi View Post
    I explained the contrast and grain issue to my friend, which she understands and is okay with. She did take issue with how stops are "numbered," though (400 to 800 is "only" 1 stop?). She can work the numbers (shutter and aperture), but I can't explain _why_ things are numbered that way (it involves some math, which is my great failing).
    Unfortunately, my explanations use bad analogies and probably makes things worse. To make a bad analogy about my analogies, it's like using cosine to explain sine - if you don't understand one, it can't be used to illustrate the other.
    Shutter speed and ISO works in the same manner though, i.e. doubling the number = 1 stop. 1/500 to 1/1000 is one stop too.

  8. #8
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,019
    It's the "why" part of the numbering system that I can't seem to communicate. I understand it, but cannot explain it adequately
    Truzi

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,951
    Oh okay you're wondering why the stops, are not spaced by equal amount but rather doubling or half for each step? I think it's because the human eye perceived such a division of steps to be equally spaced. Same thing with sound level.

  10. #10
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,019
    I like to think of it as needing a certain amount of photons striking the emulsion to give a desired exposure (reaction in the chemistry of the emulsion). If you halve the shutter speed you double the aperture size (whatever combination of settings being manipulated, including the rated ISO of the film, are adjusted in relation to each other to achieve the "balance" desired).

    The numbers themselves come from the math, and that is where I lose it

    My boss in my old position at the university I work was also a professor in the Math department. We joked that no one could let him know how bad I am at math.
    Truzi

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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