Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,826   Posts: 1,581,989   Online: 835
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,341
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by akfotog View Post
    ... but still can't understand the vast difference while using the same exposure readings.
    You used the same exposure readings but different lighting. Ian is on the right track here. The back lighting is your problem. The front of the camera was in shadow.

  2. #12
    akfotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Palmer, Alaska
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    80
    Images
    206
    Thanks for the reply all. My setup was a) for the coin, a black foamcore background with copy stand side lighting, 120mm lens, and #32 ext. tube, f22 at 1.5 sec., and b) for the camera, it was placed on the copy stand's built-in lightbox, with side lighting still on, and ext. tube removed (had to raise the camera height), same exposure reading. I used an incident meter reading from both the coin and camera positions to the camera lens, so the exposure should not have changed drastically. It's a mystery. I could understand a reflective reading being off because of the backlighting, but not an incident reading from the same positions.
    akfotog


    Seneca/National 8x10, Cambo SCX 4x5, Tachihara Wood Field 4x5, Busch Pressman 4x5, Mamiya RB67 Pro SD, Hasselblad 500 C/M, Mamiya M645 1000S, Nikon F5, Nikon F100, Nikon F4S, Nikon FM2 Chrome.

  3. #13
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,798
    Images
    1
    i don't see an obvious problem. it wad a black camera,right; what do you want it to look like?,more detail?;wel,then throw some light on it!
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,660
    Without seeing the negative, I can't give any input. Your scans show little detail on the camera, but is there detail on the actual negative? Put the neg. on a light table and look at it with a loupe. If there's detail on the neg, the trouble is in the scan.

  5. #15
    akfotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Palmer, Alaska
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    80
    Images
    206
    Thanks Ralph and E. von Hoegh. The Kodak Pony is 70% chrome and the rest is brown, and the intent was to show the camera on a pure white background. Little detail of the camera on the negative. Will try it again this weekend, time permitting, and increase the lighting (and angles). Thanks again, have a great weekend.
    akfotog


    Seneca/National 8x10, Cambo SCX 4x5, Tachihara Wood Field 4x5, Busch Pressman 4x5, Mamiya RB67 Pro SD, Hasselblad 500 C/M, Mamiya M645 1000S, Nikon F5, Nikon F100, Nikon F4S, Nikon FM2 Chrome.

  6. #16
    Maris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Noosa, Queensland, Australia.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    752
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    Without seeing the negative, I can't give any input. Your scans show little detail on the camera, but is there detail on the actual negative? Put the neg. on a light table and look at it with a loupe. If there's detail on the neg, the trouble is in the scan.
    Yes, check the negatives themselves. The positive thumbnails aren't what you shot. They are re-worked and inverted digital pictures of what you shot. Scanners are in effect digital cameras operating with their own variable (and mysterious to me) internal protocols for taking an input and turning it into some kind of output.
    Photography, the word itself, invented and defined by its author Sir John.F.W.Herschel, 14 March 1839 at the Royal Society, Somerset House, London. Quote "...Photography or the application of the Chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation,..". unquote.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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