Exposure Problems

I also posted this in the B&W film section. OK, so I put my Hasselblad 500 C/M, 120mm f4 lens, and #32 ext. tube on my copy stand today to run my first roll of film through it since I bought it. The camera itself is in mint condition, as are the lenses and accessories. I first photographed a coin (see below) based on the readings from my Minolta IVF meter, which gave me a reading of 1.5 sec. @f22. No adjustments for light falloff using Fuji Acros 100 film. The results are fairly acceptable. Later I took another photo, this time of an old Kodak Pony (see below) back light, same basic setup, using the same meter readings. The camera is totally black, with no detail whatsoever. I know the meter is OK, as I also use it for my RB67 Pro SD and 4x5s. Any ideas? The back light shouldn't affect the exposure since it was read from my meter and not the camera, right? Any insight would be appreciated.

Forgot to mention, I did take the #32 ext. tub off for the Kodak Pony photo.

First off, akfotog, I gotta say I love your work...

Is the negative really bad? Or are you just not getting detail that really is there?

If the negative is thin, I think you might have allowed the backlight to influence the meter reading when you gotta know you needed to ignore it and find a way to measure the light hitting the front of the Pony.

Did you take the two lights from the front and move them to the back? Or are they still there on the front? If the lights in the front didn't move then you would use 1.5 sec at f/22 still.

A gray card is a great way to do copy work. And there are plenty of folks here who know how to use meters that can troubleshoot your metering technique and offer helpful suggestions.

Thanks Bill, and your work also is great. No, the meter was laid flat on the copy stand facing the camera, so only the lighting entering the camera should have been registered. The camera itself is silver, almost the same as the coin (a little brighter), so I should have gotten something out of it. I did both a 1.5 sec. and 2 sec. exposure, which bared nothing. Negatives for all 6 photos taken with the ext. tube on are OK, the next six, without, are all the same. You're right, I could have tried using the reflective side of the meter, as opposed to the incident (may have been better in this situation). (empty). Will shoot another roll tomorrow using the reflective meter and see what I get. Nothing like a little experimentation. Thanks again my friend.

Never thought of that Henry,but still can't understand the vast difference while using the same exposure readings.

Incident meter should have worked fine. Are you sure the negs are terribly clear? Backlighting should have left the background bleached white but what you showed doesn't go pure white.

That was my intent Bill, kind of like photographing a model with a softbox behind, but as it turns out... No worries,nothing like playing around to get that almost perfect photograph. Thanks again for the tips.

To clarify Desertratt, the coin was photographed on a black foam core background, and the Kodak Pony was photographed with back lighting. I used the same side lighting in both cases, which could probably looks like the lighting was moved. The Kodak Pony is silver (chrome) in color, brighter, but not that much different from the shading of the coin. Nothing changed between the two, other than the use of the extension tube in the coin photo, and the removal of the extension tube in the Kodak Pony photo with back lighting.

What aperture or shutter speed adjustment did you use to take into account the fact that one set of photos involved an extension tube?

The photo of the Kodak Pony looks to me like you have used no side or front lighting. What were you using for light? Is there any chance that there is a problem with flash synch?