Bracketing and how many?

[pstake]

Early on in my musical education (was starting trumpet lessons at the time), I had a smart teacher who noticed I had a tendency to overanalyze my embouchure, often to the detriment of my playing. He reminded me what counts is the sound. If you sound like shit, a textbook set of chops counts for nothing.

What he said.

[dpurdy]

If for some reason you are unsure about the exposure and you can't re do it then it is wise to bracket if it is important. That is often the case in commercial photography when you need to keep working though you don't have time to see the film. That is for transparency. Negative film has enough latitude that you might shoot an extra sheet but you don't bracket. Shooting different views is called working the subject , not bracketing. I spent years in commercial photography and have never quite shaken the habit of working a subject. I shoot when something is acceptable because it might be the best I can do. Then I try to do something better. And then again try to do something better. You don't want to come up empty and you want to do the best you can.

[hoffy]

I think a lot of this comes from large format people who are very anal in how they shoot and take a lot of time to make the shot. They also pride themselves on not cropping (obviously for contact printing) and on a very deliberate approach.

Being a recipient of Murphys Law for a long time, I always over shoot whatever I do. Just in case....

That Murphy - He's a right royal prick, aint he!

I think this is a very valid response and this is another reason I bracket – lets say, after processing I find a fine scratch on the neg that I was targeting for…OK, I could always spot it in post, but I could also select one of the other shots from the brackets that DON’T have a scratch on them – as a matter of fact, this has happened at least once with myself. Sure the neg may not be the ‘perfect’ exposure that you may want, but I think it would be easier to deal with a one or one half stop difference then a scratch.

But that’s just me – maybe I have money to burn (not really). Maybe I have OCD (probably) – I don’t really care, its just what I do.

[Bill Burk]

Lootens recommended shooting (black and white) two stops over/under. Otherwise you don't get significantly different negatives.

For those who don't meter or whose cameras may not fire at the engraved speed - I think Lootens' advice is relevant today.

[Bill Burk]

... lets say, after processing I find a fine scratch on the neg that I was targeting for ...

This builds a strong case for taking insurance dupes - same exposure and composition but different frames.

For Large Format, you can separate the film into different cartons to send to different labs (or to be developed at different times).

I just can't bear to go out with, say 100 sheets of film and mentally tell myself "thats only 50 shots." I resolve to take one shot of each composition. Maybe two or three variations "working the subject". Still telling myself I get 100 shots.

When I find dust or a fine scratch on a neg... My best hope is that I have a similar shot but vertical instead of horizontal.

[Vaughn]

If I take a potential important shot on the last couple negatives on a roll, I'll change film and reshoot the last image over again on the new roll (120) -- just insurance.

The time I accidently ripped an 11x14 negative in half, it was nice finding the second neg I took of the same scene!

Vaughn

[polyglot]

The time I accidently ripped an 11x14 negative in half, it was nice finding the second neg I took of the same scene!

Vaughn

Now that is an impressive fit of pique!

I'm not arguing against redundancy when that is required; I will frequently shoot something on two different film stocks. I know LF shooters who will stick a chrome in one side of the holder and neg in the other and expose the latter as a "backup", sort of the ultimate bracket by taking advantage of the wider latitude of neg.

[hoffy]

This builds a strong case for taking insurance dupes - same exposure and composition but different frames.

For Large Format, you can separate the film into different cartons to send to different labs (or to be developed at different times).

I just can't bear to go out with, say 100 sheets of film and mentally tell myself "thats only 50 shots." I resolve to take one shot of each composition. Maybe two or three variations "working the subject". Still telling myself I get 100 shots.

When I find dust or a fine scratch on a neg... My best hope is that I have a similar shot but vertical instead of horizontal.

Ahhh, here's the clincher – I don’t shoot large format – Here’s the other thing, I would tend to bracket more with a roll of 36 exposures on 35mm then I would if say I was shooting a roll of 10 6x7’s. I am also sure that if I was shooting LF, I would bracket a lot less as well.

[baachitraka]

No bracketing. I used to, but like Eggleston I get confused come printing time which negative to pick, so I just shoot one frame now.
To me, it's just good practice of my skills and keeps me sharp, and it also builds trust in my ability. Since my work is personal, it's not a big deal if I lose a frame due to a problem with my technique.

If I were a professional photographer, my take on it might be different.

+1

This may be one of the reason I am thinking to buy a scanner but then I am too afraid that it may take away the fun in darkroom.

[Alan Klein]

One note about my post above. The one stop bracket is with color negatives or chromes. I don't shoot B/W. Another comment about negative color. While it's true that negative allow a lot of leeway even with Portra, the colors are not the same between shots even at 1 stop bracket. That doesn't make a difference to me because with landscapes, no one really can tell the difference if they're only looking at one selected result. But if you're shooting where the color have to match the originally, getting the exposure exact is important.

Have other found the same with their color shooting?