13 stops

[baachitraka]

http://petapixel.com/2016/03/29/exposure-affects-film-photos/

 

[Dali]

Or how the re-invent the wheel.

"The craft of photography" by David Vestal... A book written decades ago and which demonstrates the same thing and comes to a similar conclusion.

 

[baachitraka]

I am relatively young and it is indeed interesting for me to discover it.

 

[MattKing]

Or how the re-invent the wheel.

"The craft of photography" by David Vestal... A book written decades ago and which demonstrates the same thing and comes to a similar conclusion.

I am relatively young and it is indeed interesting for me to discover it.

To Dali: if we edited out all the examples where someone posted something on APUG that had previously been posted before, you could probably read all of APUG in an afternoon.

To: baachitraka: while it is true this has been said before, it doesn't hurt to point out that it has been recently said again, on a resource that many people who aren't on APUG might come across. It is also good that they used current films (the David Vestal book examples would have been on older films).

Photo Engineer has several times posted a similar series on APUG.

The only minor quibble I would have with the petapixel article is that they should have done some closer analysis of the markedly over-exposed examples - to show more clearly that there is some degradation in resolution and contrast in the highlights, and some shifts in colour.

 

[pentaxuser]

This might be explained by the different light conditions in the male v female portraits but the Kodak Portra seems to cope with underexposure a little better than the Fuji film. Does anyone else feel that way or is it my imagination and/or explained by the different light conditions?

pentaxuser

 

[Dali]

I am relatively young and it is indeed interesting for me to discover it.

I understand but it is way better and less time consuming to read technical books (after all, photography is not than complex) than chasing internet site where ideas are recycled ad nauseam (and sometimes inaccurate).

 

[Mr Bill]

This might be explained by the different light conditions in the male v female portraits but the Kodak Portra seems to cope with underexposure a little better than the Fuji film. Does anyone else feel that way or is it my imagination and/or explained by the different light conditions?

Hi, the test probably opens the eyes of many people, but it's too poorly controlled to make any critical decisions from.

I've been involved in a number of major film tests over the years on behalf of a large studio chain. We used the low speed versions of pro color neg films, so these were mostly all we tested. Our testing regimen was to shoot under controlled studio conditions, with the same subjects and same clothing, etc. We ran from perhaps 2 or 3 f-stops under to perhaps 5 stops overexposed. Our evaluation was based on printing to the appropriate pro paper, then compare prints. The prints were all color balanced by hand for skin tone matches. All told, probably on the order of hundreds of times more "effort" than in the petapixel test.

We typically found image degradation (most wouldn't care, but we were very finicky) at a half to one stop underexposed, but it depends on the subject. Mainly, when the darkest areas can't print as dark as desired, they will get a grainy appearance. But if your test scene doesn't include such dark areas (or dark-complexioned subjects) then this won't be a limit. On the overexposed side, 3 or 4 stops were typically not a problem, but beyond that the prints would typically show certain color effects (they are "acceptable" in a product, but are recognizable by someone with experience).

Anyway, the pro color neg films DO have a tremendous exposure latitude, but if one goes as far as the petapixel article suggests, the quality of studio portraits would be seriously degraded.

 

[pdeeh]

Why not paste your observations as a comment at PETApixel on the article?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am relatively young and it is indeed interesting for me to discover it.

As you gain experience you will learn some of the wonderful things about film. I get approximately 13 to 14 f/stops on color print and black & white film. The only problem is printing that range on black & with paper which only has the latitude of sever f/stops [burning, dodging, and bleaching help].

 

[Mr Bill]

Why not paste your observations as a comment at PETApixel on the article?

Hi, did you mean me? If so, short answer is, "Life's too short."

In all seriousness, it's largely a thankless task with little to gain unless you are selling yourself/services, which I'm not. I see APUG as being at a different level than most websites, with people generally more interested in how things work, so I'm willing to put more effort here.

 

[baachitraka]

I never shot any pro color negative film till today and probably will not shoot any in the near future. So the article about the latitude of pro color negative in petapixel is rather new for me.

I started shooting film from 2011 and after experimenting with different BW negative films and developers I now settle down with HP5+ and Tanol. Simply the best combo in MF and in 135 I am biased to Fomapan 200/Orwo UN54+(not cheap anymore) in Rodinal.

 

[pdeeh]

Hi, did you mean me? If so, short answer is, "Life's too short."

In all seriousness, it's largely a thankless task with little to gain unless you are selling yourself/services, which I'm not. I see APUG as being at a different level than most websites, with people generally more interested in how things work, so I'm willing to put more effort here.

I thought they would have added something to the discussion over there, and helped educate and clarify things for people who will probably never ever come to APUG.

If life's too short to go ctrl-c ctrl-v, I'd have thought life's too short to bother writing that life's too short.

This "special APUG club" mentality is a bit dispiriting coming from someone who clearly has some valuable experience to share.

Still, your choice, of course, as ever. But disappointing.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks for that detailed explanation. While you haven't said so directly, I'll take it that in an absence of a direct comment that your tests or belief from those tests to show that there is in fact little or nothing to choose between the Fuji 400H and Portra 400 in terms of its ability to handle underexposure.

Would this be a correct conclusion on my part?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Mr Bill]

... I'll take it that in an absence of a direct comment that your tests or belief from those tests to show that there is in fact little or nothing to choose between the Fuji 400H and Portra 400 in terms of its ability to handle underexposure.

We only used (and tested) Portra in the 160 speed, but I'm guessing that the 400 behaves in a very similar manner. We DID actually test Fuji NPH (400) when it was new, not the 400 H per the article. We found the exposure latitudes were ballpark similar, so I'd guess the current film follows that pattern. But I can't say for certain. But I'd probably bet a lot of money on it (after first going through the data sheet with a fine-tooth comb).

But my main point is that the petapixel tests were not very good with respect to being a direct comparison. They were more of a demonstration of the large exposure latitude.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks, Mr Bill, for the clarification. I must admit my reasoning before seeing the petapixel article and pictures would have been that the latitude for both under and over exposure would have been similar in the case of both films. It looks as if this is the correct reasoning based on your fairly rigorous tests

pentaxuser

 

[tedr1]

Don't try doing that with color reversal "transparency" film

 

[Mr Bill]

I thought they would 've added something to the discussion over there, and helped educate and clarify things for people who will probably never ever come to APUG.
...
This "special APUG club" mentality is a bit dispiriting coming from someone who clearly has some valuable experience to share.

Still, your choice, of course, as ever. But disappointing.

I'd rather see the interested parties have to come over to APUG. I think it's much more in depth, and therefore useful, in my opinion.

If you'd like, feel free to copy my post over there. I'll answer any questions here.