Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,575   Posts: 1,621,929   Online: 1075
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    lft
    lft is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    26

    Two unrelated questions!

    1. I'm having real trouble with my outdoor shots. While human subjects are usually exposed well, I am always getting blown out ugly skies, which is pretty lame. How do I expose for good skies while the subject is exposed as well?

    2. I am also looking to achieve cleaner, more "glamorous" portrait shots. When I use tri-x 400, I get an in focus, well exposed shot that looks slightly dirty (if you know what I mean). Can someone recommend a great black and white film that is very clean and great for portrait with very nice tones?

    Thanks in advance...

  2. #2
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,833
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by lft View Post
    1. I'm having real trouble with my outdoor shots. While human subjects are usually exposed well, I am always getting blown out ugly skies, which is pretty lame. How do I expose for good skies while the subject is exposed as well?
    Fill flash maybe.

    Quote Originally Posted by lft View Post
    2. I am also looking to achieve cleaner, more "glamorous" portrait shots. When I use tri-x 400, I get an in focus, well exposed shot that looks slightly dirty (if you know what I mean). Can someone recommend a great black and white film that is very clean and great for portrait with very nice tones?

    Thanks in advance...
    Delta or T-Max?
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

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

  3. #3
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    1. Problem is a range of subject brightness greater than the film can handle. Mark has it right: anything to throw some light into the darker areas so that they are closer in brightness to the sky. That way, exposing/developing so that the sky looks more natural doesn't result in relative underexposure of the darker areas. Even a large white foamcore board or a light-colored wall can serve as a reflector.

    2. Second the vote for TMAX or Delta. I like 320TXP as well but it's trickier in bright outdoor light. Not sure what you mean by "dirty". Do you mean flat and lacking contrast? If so, try downrating 400TX to 200 or 250 and developing the same as you are already. See what you get and adjust development time accordingly.

    Guess I really didn't need to post this, since I basically reiterated everything Mark said earlier, and better!
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  4. #4
    lft
    lft is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    26
    I guess I should rephrase! I'm looking for smoother tones rather than the real grainy pictures that I usually get from Tri-X

  5. #5
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,684
    Images
    148
    MikeSeb is right you need to drop the contrast, increase exposure and cut development slightly, and that will help with both your questions.

    I guess by dirty you mean the gritty grainy look that Tri-X in particular is known for and was exploited by photo journalists in the 60's & 70's. If you want the speed then switch to Tmax or Delta 400, or the 100 ISO versions if speed isn't an issue. All those film will give you better tonality.

    Ian

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    356
    you want to "darken" the skies it sounds like? Maybe orange or red filter and a polarizer. Lengthen exposure appropriately and highlight subject (flash).
    * Just because your eyes are closed, doesn't mean the lights in the darkroom are off. *
    * When the film you put in the camera is worth more than the camera you put the film in... *
    * When I started using 8x10, it amazed me how many shots were close to the car. *

  7. #7
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In a darkroom far, far away...
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,115
    Blog Entries
    30
    Images
    19
    Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

    As to the grain, are you processing your own film or sending out?
    Thank you.
    -CW

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  8. #8
    JDP
    JDP is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bedfordshire, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Searust View Post
    you want to "darken" the skies it sounds like? Maybe orange or red filter and a polarizer. Lengthen exposure appropriately and highlight subject (flash).
    Its not clear if your problem 1) is with B&W film, but if it is then I second the suggestion from Jeff - it will work a treat (and a yellow 1 stop filter would give the most subtle change, a red the greatest).

  9. #9
    bsdunek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,203
    Images
    211
    If the skies are blue, as Jeff says, use a yellow, orange, or red filter or a polarizer. If the sky is hazy, use a graduated netural density filter. It will be darkened, but still won't have much detail.

    For outdoor use, I would recommend a slower, finer grain film. Something like Ilford FP4 might be good. Relatively fine grain and higher contrast. If the contrast seems to high, pull it a little. It will give smooth skies and sharp detail. Do you even need the speed of Tri-X for portraits? Even there I would go with a slower, finer grain film.

    My philosophy has always been, go with the slowest, finest grain film that will do the job. Unless you're looking for the grainy look, why make things difficult. Just IMHO.
    Bruce

    Moma don't take my Kodachrome away!
    Oops, Kodak just did!
    For all practical purposes, they've taken Kodak away.


    BruceCSdunekPhotography.zenfolio.com

  10. #10
    lft
    lft is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Walrath View Post
    Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

    As to the grain, are you processing your own film or sending out?
    I develop my own.

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