Basic exposure question???

[Nicholas Lindan]

I like the Vestal book which is old(60's-70's) He writes as though he were speaking to you. In plain English.

Vestal is a good writer, very forthright and plain. That was C.S. Lewis' advice - to write as you speak; he assumed you spoke well.

Another of the golden oldies is Lootens on Enlarging and Print Quality.

I would stay away from Minor White.

[RalphLambrecht]

Help ... I'm confused. I've recently become interested in film after a long stint using digital processes. I've begun reading Henry Horenstein's "Beyond basic photography" but I can't seem to move past something he says on page 6 ... "An underexposed negative will not produce enough silver in the shadows to print adequate detail, so the shadows will print as flat, textureless, muddy-gray tones". By that I presume he means that the same shadows given more exposure and the same amount of development would print darker. The prints on page 9 would tend to support that idea. The T shirt in the underexposed print in the middle of the page is indeed a flat, muddy-gray. The same T shirt in the over exposed print to the right is a nice crisp black ... I don't get it ... Doesn't less exposure mean less silver density everywhere on the negative ... so darker tones everywhere on the print?

Greg

You are right and so is Henry, not a bad book by the way. The key here is that photographic processes are not linear. In other words, yes, less exposure means less exposure everywhere on the tonal scale, but 1/3 stop less is deadly for the shadow (information lost) but workable in the highlights (all info is there, just shifted). The old rule of photography is: 'expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights'. A lack of exposure shows its ugly face in the shadows first. That's what Henry meant.

To prove his point to you, try this:

1. expose a few frames with the same scene
2. start with the box speed and then reduce the speed (increase exposure) by one stop at a time
3. don't hesitate to overexpose by several stop (try 6 stops of overexposure)
4. develop the entire roll as usual
5. print all frames by keeping the print highlights consistent (you may have to change contrast slightly, and the exposure times will get ridiculous for the extreme overexposures, but ignore that for this test)
6. when done , pick the frame with made the best print

Dollars to donuts, it won't be the box speed. It will be a frame with amazing shadow detail at terrible film speed. Now, you got a new problem!

[Chan Tran]

Thanks Ralph! I understand Henry completely and understand the frustration that Greg had but I didn't know how to explain it.

[RalphLambrecht]

Thanks Ralph! I understand Henry completely and understand the frustration that Greg had but I didn't know how to explain it.

Yeah, but you are better with math than I am.

[gregmacc]

Thanks for the responses all ... Might have a look at Vestal ...
Ralph ... Better with math?

[RalphLambrecht]

Thanks for the responses all ... Might have a look at Vestal ...
Ralph ... Better with math?

Was my comment not obviously directed at Chan Tran?