Compensation ISO + OR -

[colin wells]

I was shooting some ISO 400 in to park the other sunny day taking pics of my dog playing .My dog is black .The pics came out with the grass wishey washey any advice on the way to go for compensating with the ISO .Thanks

 

[mpirie]

Ideally Colin, you should do some testing to reach the correct speed point for your camera/processing etc.

Then you can look at your metering technique.

As a ball-park though, you should be looking at one-half a stop reduction in the ISO, so 400ISO film could be more like 300 (320 in practice) ISO dependant on testing.

Mike

 

[ic-racer]

Meter close on the black dog so it fills the whole frame. Underexpose 3 stops from there. That should give negatives with texture in the dog (so called "Zone II").

 

[rrusso]

You could always just meter for the background and use some fill flash.

 

[MattKing]

I was shooting some ISO 400 in to park the other sunny day taking pics of my dog playing .My dog is black .The pics came out with the grass wishey washey any advice on the way to go for compensating with the ISO .Thanks

I'm assuming you were using negative film.
When you say "The pics came out with the grass wishey washey" are you talking about prints, scans or ??, and did you do the processing, or was it done by a lab?
Your negatives may be fine. Your prints and/or scans may reflect the automatic settings on the printer or scanner, which probably did their best to make your black dog come out middle grey, with a corresponding "wash-out" of the green grass around it.

To show the differences, here are two scans from the same negative:
The light one:



And a better one from exactly the same negative:

 

[Bill Burk]

If your dog is clear on the negative then you need to give more exposure.

I just developed a batch of my kids in band uniforms (black pants) and there isn’t much detail in the pants.

Your answer is ISO -

Maybe 250 or even 200

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you use an incident light meter, then you will get better exposures of your dog. At that point you may then decide to open the lens half an f/stop or a full f/stop. The classic examples of use of incident light meters are:

• A black cat in front of a black background
• A bride wearing a white wedding dress in front of a white wall
• Getting faces and people to be shown in photographs while skiing

http://jimdoty.com/learn/exp101/exp_inc_meter/exp_inc_meter.html
http://www.sekonic.com/united-states/classroom/meteringtechniques/benefitsofincident.aspx
http://www.sekonic.com/l-478/incident-vs-reflected.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/find/Product_Resources/lightmeters1.jsp

 

[Craig75]

if grass is wishywasy then shot is overexposed. If your dog was filling a lot of the frame then your meter is thinking whole scene is darker than it actually is and so overexposing. try -1 and -2 exposure compensation and see which looks best - then you can just use that setting for that framing of your dog every time. If you choose to frame your dog differently, eg have him/her running in distance you may not need to correct for that type of shot as the black is only a small part of scene

(or buy an 18% grey dog)

 

[MattKing]

(or buy an 18% grey dog)

Or a dalmation .

 

[tessar]

I've also shot a quickly moving black dog in the OP's kind of setting. With an aperture-priority auto-shutter camera I use a quick shortcut -- meter the grass and hold the exposure. I've found grass (or a worn paved-road surface) is close enough to 18% gray in most instances. This works for me; YMMV of course

 

[Svenedin]

What camera do you have? I you have spot metering you could spot meter on the dog and then underexpose so that the dog ends up black.

 

[colin wells]

Thank you all for your answers the film is unfortunately processed in a lab so i have no control over that .The camera is a Contax RTS 1 so it is aperture control and manual only with no exposure lock but does have + and - compensation dial

 

[MattKing]

Thank you all for your answers the film is unfortunately processed in a lab so i have no control over that .The camera is a Contax RTS 1 so it is aperture control and manual only with no exposure lock but does have + and - compensation dial

And how are the negatives?
Not the prints or scans, but the negatives themselves.

 

[colin wells]

The negatives are the same as the pics the dog very black but you can see features and the grass uneven and washed out

 

[cooltouch]

One handy metering tip I like to keep in mind is that grass is 18% gray. So when in doubt you can always meter on the grass, recompose and shoot. Your readings should be very close to that if you used an incident light meter. Resist metering your black dog, since the meter will see his black coat as 18% gray. Then everything will really be washed out.

Although it isn't recommended with all C-41 emulsions, I've had excellent luck reducing a film's ISO by about 25%. So, ISO 400 at 320, 200 at 160, etc. The results are quite pleasing: finer grain, better saturation -- just an overall better, more "professional" looking result. You might give this a try.

 

[Craig75]

The negatives are the same as the pics the dog very black but you can see features and the grass uneven and washed out

if dog looks dark on negative then it sounds over exposed so try -1 and -2 exposure compensation. Take him back to the park, take a shot without any compensation, then -.5, -1, -1.5 and -2 - dont worry about getting good shots - just quickly run through the exposure sequence in same light. finish roll off and get it developed and printed. Choose the exposure setting which looks best then take him back to the park and you should get a shot which will do him justice for your wall..

you could also try a polarizing filter if grass still looks weak. this link https://photographylife.com/how-to-use-a-polarizer looks a good explanation of how they work and what they do.

 

[MattKing]

The negatives are the same as the pics the dog very black but you can see features and the grass uneven and washed out

I'm confused. It may, however, be a problem with terminology.
If the dog is dark on the negative, that would suggest that the density on that part of the negative is too high - the negative would be thick, not thin.
But that in turn would suggest the density on the part of the negative that corresponds with the grass should be even greater - that part of the negative would be even thicker, not washed out.
May we see a photo of the negatives themselves?