Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,311   Posts: 1,681,852   Online: 915
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Galah View Post
    OK, take it from basic principles.

    Snow is white, so you want it to look white in the print (metering without exposure compensation will render it as grey in your print).

    You want the snow to show texture in the print? Open up (let in MORE light: use a smaller "f" numer, i.e. a larger opening in the aperture) 2 to 2.5 stops.
    It will already show texture when you take your reading directly off the snow itself, i.e. put it in the middle of the scale.
    No need (on the contrary) to open up the aperture for that.

  2. #22
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,539
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    If your negatives are super dense, you may be over-developing. I'm surprised no one mentioned that yet.

    Have you run tests with this film and developer combo? Does it give you consistent results in other high contrast situations?

  3. #23
    bowzart's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Anacortes, WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,219
    Images
    15
    If you read the snow on the middle of the scale it will certainly show texture but it will land in that part of the curve (straight line) where tones are separated the most. Also, all those dark things like trees, skiers, space aliens, schmoos, will be featureless black (holes in the world). What you'd naturally do then in the darkroom as an intuitive remedy to a vastly underexposed negative would be to increase the contrast to bring it back up to a full scale, and then your snow will look like chromium plated on sandpaper. Try it and see.

    You've got a meter capable of straight incident reading. All you have to do is use it.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    13
    ok. my temp of chemicals was roughly 70F and according to D-76 I required 14 mins.. I did an initial water wash for a minute then developer I did an initial 30 sec agitation and then 10 seconds every minute for the remaining 13.5 mins.. Sprint stop for 2 mins, Ilford Rapid Fixer 1:9 for (from memory) 10 mins, wash for 3 mins, Hypo clear for 3 mins, another wash for 5 mins dumping frequently, then photoflo for 30 secs or so..

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,884
    bowzart is right. And as alluded earlier, if you compensate the Zone V placement of the snow with +1 or +1.5 development, sparkles and textures will sing... perhaps even a bit TOO loudly especially if you print the now Zone VI or VI.5 down to V or V.5. I know it sounds strange but SOMETIMES that's the way to print snow. You can also compensate with selenium toner in lieu of the overdevelopment for a smilar effect plus the added benefit of archival treatment of the negs... all else done properly.

  6. #26
    bowzart's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Anacortes, WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,219
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1234 View Post
    ... And as alluded earlier, if you compensate the Zone V placement of the snow with +1 or +1.5 development, sparkles and textures will sing... perhaps even a bit TOO loudly ...
    It's not just the sparkles and textures, although that is certainly an important element.

    Snow covers things that together may constitute a very complex surface creating a new surface that modulates light in a very subtle way. Placing the whites at mid value and increasing development or printing on higher grade of paper exaggerates these subtle differences and makes them scream when singing a lullaby would be more appropriate.

    If the snow isn't represented by the part of the curve where it belongs, the tonal relationships can never be correct no matter what you do in developing the film or in printing. Also, the absence of shadow densities and the attempt to represent mid values by densities that more appropriately belong to shadows will give a strange, and generally unattractive appearance to the image as a whole. The net effect would be similar to "pushing film," which relies on a simplistic assumption that exposure and development are interchangeable. They aren't. It may be possible to help the shadows (see dfcardwell's thread on shaping the curve with Rodinal) by using minimized agitation, but that requires some background experience. The last thing one would normally do with a snow scene would be to "push", but that is exactly what would be done if placing the snow at mid value.

  7. #27
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    My rule of thumb for shooting in snow: Meter with the camera and open up a couple of stops.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,884
    Quote Originally Posted by bowzart View Post
    The last thing one would normally do with a snow scene would be to "push", but that is exactly what would be done if placing the snow at mid value.
    Everything you stated is correct. This is why I said you might "sometimes" want to use that method. It depends on the condition of the snow, lighting, compositional elements, and what you want to achieve. It was only one of many options I listed.

    I only did that a couple of times:
    1. When shooting a frozen snow covered lake and all I need to show (enhance) were very subtle tones.
    2. When the lighting was a bit soft so shadows and textures were softened.

    It just depends on the particular situation.

  9. #29
    Prest_400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    595
    I'm curious.
    I did take a quick photo of a snowed path, overcast white sky, and trees (dark) in the middle of the composition. Snow doesn't have much texture, but it's white (at least to my eye). I can remember that all I did was follow the meter reading, maybe just 1/2 stop over.
    It has come out well to the trees, that affected the reading (center weighted metering), so I overexposed; Negatives look quite dense. Or the drugstore lab corrected it magically?

    With slide film, do you recommend to expose 2 stops over the meter reading? Negatives holds this extra light well, but slide...

  10. #30
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,914
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Prest_400 View Post
    With slide film, do you recommend to expose 2 stops over the meter reading? Negatives holds this extra light well, but slide...
    No. The idea is that you give it the right amount of light, not extra light.

    All this talk of two stops extra isn't to actually over expose by two stops but to compensate for the meter thinking there is more light than there really is and telling you to under expose by two stops.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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