Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,280   Posts: 1,534,874   Online: 820
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    233

    Analyzing some negatives.

    Hopefully this works. I blew out the highlights on an entire roll of film. Here are a few examples. I'd love some feedback on what I likely did wrong. I took these photos in the midst of an early morning heavy snow. There was snow on the ground, and on the trees, and the visibility was low.
    Fm2n on tripod, 28mm ais lens, f8 or f11 @ 1/60s or 1/30s. Using tri-x cut in half (iso set at 200). D76 (-15% kodak's recommended time), but I didn't jot down the temperature (I know…). Whatever it was, I cut back the time 15%.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	AA011.jpg 
Views:	174 
Size:	491.0 KB 
ID:	87076
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	AA012.jpg 
Views:	170 
Size:	447.8 KB 
ID:	87077
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	AA016.jpg 
Views:	171 
Size:	463.4 KB 
ID:	87078

  2. #2
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,862
    Those negatives look fine to me. The proof of a negative is in the printing. Are you finding these things deficient in some way when printing?
    f/22 and be there.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    460
    They look about 1 stop overexposed to me.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    233
    Quote Originally Posted by BetterSense View Post
    Those negatives look fine to me. The proof of a negative is in the printing. Are you finding these things deficient in some way when printing?
    Yea, they aren't printing well at all. Unfortunately there is just no texture in the highlights (particularly the highlights on the ground), so it's a wash. There's also a muddiness or lack of clarity to the negatives, which I don't quite understand either. It's not a lack of sharpness - the tree's for instance are in focus.. Here is another example, and in this circumstance, I managed to get good texture in the highlights, so this photo printed ok, but it still had that kinda lack of clearness to it, if that makes sense.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	AA020.jpg 
Views:	170 
Size:	557.2 KB 
ID:	87080

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    California desert
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    680

    paper

    What kind of photo paper are you printing these negs on? Variable contrast?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    233
    Quote Originally Posted by snapguy View Post
    What kind of photo paper are you printing these negs on? Variable contrast?
    Yep, variable contrast.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    139
    I find getting high quality tones in snow is tricky, especially in low light. My guess would be as follows. Low light in a snow storm is probably very flat. I would try expanded development. Your D76 time (Kodak minus 15% for ASA 200) is my standard time for medium contrast situations. For low contrast, I would try adding back your 15% and develop at chart time and see what you get. Agitation is another variable. I use Kodak's recommended 4/6 inversions per 30 seconds. Many consider this vigorous agitation. Five inversions work well for me.
    For snow in sunlight, try a yellow filter. It boosts highlight separation in the snow. Good luck.

  8. #8
    dehk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    W Michigan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by mporter012 View Post
    Yep, variable contrast.
    Lower the contrast and or burn in the snow?
    - Derek
    [ Insert meaningless camera listing here ]

  9. #9
    darkosaric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,682
    Negative looks ok, you don't need to change the way you developed the negative.

    You need to improved your printing skills. I know, easier sad than done - it took me 6-7 years and thousands of waisted papers to be able to make easily prints that are good to me (and still not good enough comparing to many other high standards that I saw in top galleries).

  10. #10
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,178
    A 'blown out' highlight is something one would see on a print. You have shown negatives, however. ??

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