Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,712   Posts: 1,483,008   Online: 761
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: Placement

  1. #1
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,294
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19

    Placement

    So I'm reading Dunn & Wakefield's Exposure Manual and trying to digest some of the ideas.

    One of the ideas is using the lowest possible exposure for the SBR, I know not so new, but the reason for doing it was at least new to me. The shadows are placed on the film toe to match them against the papers shoulder.

    Printing strictly from the negatives straight line skews how the paper responds. It opens the shadows and blocks up the highlights.

    The other idea that has been floating about my head is where to place certain subjects to improve the relationship to the rest of a photo.

    My thought here is that we expect faces in full sun to be really bright, not so much in shaded situations. (This is where I think a lot of flash photography falls on it's face, the subject gets too bright and no longer fits the setting.)

    So I had two thoughts;

    1) It seems to me that at say street fairs and the like where there are shaded areas but lots of sun too placing all the exposures based on faces in shade a zone or two below normal should place all the faces to better match expectations.

    2) In low light reducing exposure should also make things look more normal in a print.

    I have only tested #2 and only a little but so far it seems to have merit. 400 speed film shot at 800 without any process change seem to place faces nicely on paper.

    Anybody else see similar results?
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  2. #2
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,436
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    2) In low light reducing exposure should also make things look more normal in a print.
    That's something I read about in Gene Nocon's Darkroom Printing book. The idea being that if you took a 'normal' light meter reading at night or a dark scene like a band on a stage, the meter will do what it always does and give the correct exposure for an 18% grey scene. A night or low light scene is significantly lower than 18% brightness so less exposure is needed than the meter suggests..


    Steve.

  3. #3
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    My idea is that in a very contrasted situation the human eye "does not see the contrast", only the film does. The human vision reacts instantly to different light conditions in the spot it's observing at the moment. So the goal we have, as photographers, if we want to render a picture in a "natural" way, is to flat the contrast (be it done in printing, or after scanning, or whatever) so that the scene appears as our mind reminds it and not as it was for the film.

    If the scene is entirely in the shade, it should be exposed normally, for no idea of "shade" (dark) to be given;
    If the scene is part in sunlight and part in shade, and using a negative/print process, it should be exposed in a way that allows a sensation of contrast flattening (opening of shadows during printing) that means with most material exposing for the shadows and control highlights during printing;
    If the scene is part in sunlight and part in shade, and using slide film for projection, I would preserve highlights from burning and let the rest fall where it may;
    If situation as above, but the final product is a slide scan, I would open shadows and reduce global sensation of contrast as in case 2;
    If we have a night scene in which there is a great contrast (nocturne scene with lit fountain, monument) when using slides I would expose so as not to burn highlights, and be "glad" that shadows fall into full black as this is a night scene.
    If situation as above but using negatives I would aim for the "slide effect" and not try to flatten contrast, letting ample areas of the frame to go pure black if necessary;
    If the subject is photographed at night but no "night" is to be seen in the frame I expose to give a "non night" atmosphera;
    Example:
    http://fineartamerica.com/featured/b...o-ruggeri.html

    In this case, and IMO, for a nice and "correct" rendering of the subject on the film all tones must be reconducted inside the film curves "the normal way", without trying to convey the fact that it is a nocturne picture.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  4. #4
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,945
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    So I'm reading Dunn & Wakefield's Exposure Manual and trying to digest some of the ideas.

    One of the ideas is using the lowest possible exposure for the SBR, I know not so new, but the reason for doing it was at least new to me. The shadows are placed on the film toe to match them against the papers shoulder.
    Placing anything on paper's shoulder just makes it (tonal separation) worse.

  5. #5
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    So I'm reading Dunn & Wakefield's Exposure Manual and trying to digest some of the ideas.

    The shadows are placed on the film toe to match them against the papers shoulder.
    That's not exactly correct. The darkest point in determining the LER of a paper is 90% D-Max. The idea is that the average shadow value will look natural if placed on this point. Within reason, it doesn't matter where it falls on the film curve.

    The idea of minimum exposure is to offer higher film speeds, reduce graininess, obtain maximum sharpness, and maintain reasonable printing times. There isn't anything intrinsic from a tone reproduction standpoint about it. See attachments. The reason why film speed is determined from the shadows is because it was determined shadow reproduction was critical to image quality.

    If I understand the example of the art's fair correctly, it should be more about contrast than exposure placement. The effect you describe can just as easily be accomplished by exposing well and printing down.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Normal_4_quad.jpg   Normal_4_quad_plus_one.jpg  
    Last edited by Stephen Benskin; 05-26-2011 at 11:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #6
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,294
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    That's something I read about in Gene Nocon's Darkroom Printing book. The idea being that if you took a 'normal' light meter reading at night or a dark scene like a band on a stage, the meter will do what it always does and give the correct exposure for an 18% grey scene. A night or low light scene is significantly lower than 18% brightness so less exposure is needed than the meter suggests..


    Steve.
    Yep.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  7. #7
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,294
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Placing anything on paper's shoulder just makes it (tonal separation) worse.
    I should have said, in relation to the toe and shoulder.

    One of their thoughts is that trying to get everything onto the straight line is futile anyway, they demonstrate a toeing effect where flare actually creates an effective toe that follows extra, unneeded, exposure up the curve.

    Another part of Dunn & Wakefield's thought is that it makes very little sense to include shadows on the negative that aren't going to be used in the print.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  8. #8
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,196
    Those examples appear to be more about exposure technique than exposure placement on the film curve. Adjustments to the meter’s recommended exposure need to be made in situations beyond what the meter was designed for. Some call it being smarter than the meter. Spot lighting has a small lit area surrounded by a large unimportant dark area. The meter is going to want to compensate for the dark area which will overexpose the lit area of the principle subject.

    Another example is shooting a daylight scene where you want to include a large amount of sky. The light bright area will make the meter underexpose the land area. The solution is to either open up some or tilt the camera down to balance the two elements for the meter, then reframe.

    Mark, I have Dunn’s fourth edition. Where did you read the part about low lighting and the thoughts about not including shadows?

  9. #9
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,294
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19

    Q

    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    That's not exactly correct. The darkest point in determining the LER of a paper is 90% D-Max. The idea is that the average shadow value will look natural if placed on this point. Within reason, it doesn't matter where it falls on the film curve.
    Thanks for the correction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    The idea of minimum exposure is to offer higher film speeds, reduce graininess, obtain maximum sharpness, and maintain reasonable printing times. There isn't anything intrinsic from a tone reproduction standpoint about it. See attachments. The reason why film speed is determined from the shadows is because it was determined shadow reproduction was critical to image quality.
    Their suggestion was one of the range we might chose to place on film from a long scale scene.

    Essentially choosing how much shadow is important in a given scene.

    Where detail becomes acceptable on film is technically important, what tone we actually put there is subjective.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    If I understand the example of the art's fair correctly, it should be more about contrast than exposure placement. The effect you describe can just as easily be accomplished by exposing well and printing down.
    If by contrast you mean the faces in sun are brighter than the faces in the shadows, then yes.

    My thought is that once I've pegged the shadow point I want, that the faces and other tones, will fall properly in relation to each other. Essentially one specific enlarger exposure would place the faces properly in relation to each other.

    Shaded faces will look shaded, those in full sun wil look like they are in full sun.

    Let's assume for a second that the fair is the setting for a portrait.

    The setting/background could be made to fall in a very believable manner from shade to sun, the challenge in camera becomes how to fit/light/isolate the main portrait subject in that scene in such a way that looks natural.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  10. #10
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,294
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    Mark, I have Dunn’s fourth edition. Where did you read the part about low lighting and the thoughts about not including shadows?
    Motion picture and color work section, third edition page 32.

    They suggest there is no point in including shadows on the neg that will never be printed.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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