E100G and FP-100c45 performance-exposure comparisons- need advice

[Meirronaldi]

I am getting ready to shoot a rather large project with my 4x5 camera. We are looking for 35-40 finished high quality images. The subjects is architecture both interiors and exteriors. The catch is that I will have three days to shoot. After that I cannot get into the spaces again. It is a hospital and once many of the rooms are actually put in service the rooms will be in use and I simply am not going to be allowed back in. I have secured a stock of e100g my preferred film for this type of thing along with a stock of FP100c45. I will not have the luxury of taking some shots and sending them to the lab as a test as the location is rural. I have not shot film with my 4x5 in a number of years and films have changed. The work process I follow is as follows; set up the scene; meter, shoot a BW instant test shot to make sure that things are generally looking OK or need/make adjustments. Once things are ready I shoot a color instant as a final test. In the old days (when Polaroid was still around) the color instant gave a pretty good exposure test regading highlights, shadow detail etc. The price of film and processing has gotten $$$ as you all know so I would prefer not to waste any more then necessary. I am curious if someone has used this workflow and how the various films now compare in terms of exposure, similar contrast, detail etc. I typically find myself shooting 1/2 stop under on the interiors and use some supplemental light to put detail in the shadows. The e100g will be lab processed then scanned as this will be converted into a presentation book. I am sure there will be lots of good advice. Many thanks in advance!!!

 

[BrianShaw]

Natural light or strobes? No matter, I would forgoe the elaborate proofing and use a good spot meter or flash meter instead. Transparency film is fine, but if it were me I'd opt for both color negative and B+W films instead.

 

[Meirronaldi]

The exterior shots will be natural light. The interior shots will be a combination of existing building lights supplemented by some LED studio lights and depending on the rooms special lights such as surgical lights, monitors etc. I learned large format film architectural photography form a guy who only did architectural photography and he would do test shot after test shot adjusting everything from lighting to which way the flower heads were pointed on vases of flowers he would position into the scene. Somtines setting up multiple exposures to get windows and interiors properly exposed or turning on specialty lighting on/off for a short amount of time to catch a detail. Getting into the location is often a one shot deal just like this. His work process and the one I follow is based on creating redunancy so that after bracketing the shots expecting the worst he was pretty much covered confident he would get a useable images from each setting. With digital I would see instantly what I have. With the instant film so expensive these days shooting lots of tests is less of an option. I am curious just how close these two films behave alike? I know they both have pretty tight exposure tolerance. For example if I get a shot ready and I am getting good highlights and shadow detail on the FP100c will the same exposure settings with the e100g give me similar exposure results for the most part or are there significant differences? If I have long exposures is their reciprocity the similar? I get three days of shooting. I will shoot between 90-130 sheets of film done. The instant test shots are insurance that I won't end up with 130 sheets of poorly exposed film. I have to have 30-40 good images when I am done. Again --- Thanks!!!

 

[Rudeofus]

I have never shot a 4x5 camera but do have some experience with both E100G and Fuji FP100C in medium format. In terms of sensitivity and color palette, FP100C is similar but more saturated than E100G, actually quite close to E100VS. I'm not sure about deep shadows in FP100C and hope others can shed some light on that.

But my most important point: once in a lifetime occasions are hardly the right time for experiments. Regardless of what seasoned experts may write about E100G and FP100C45, you need the confidence on location that you can make this work. You get that confidence from running a couple of test shots with that camera in an area where you have fast turn around E6 labs (or can do home processing). Compare the scans (since that's your final output medium) to FP100C45 instant shots and judge for yourself, based on what's important to you.

Stack up all the resources you can muster for this event (test shots with notes, light meters, practice shots with this camera, equipment list, backup plan for broken equipment, ...), and you will have a high chance of succeeding, everything else would just be a gamble IMHO. Remember that PPPPPPP.

 

[Meirronaldi]

Thanks for the advice!!!

Again thanks for the advise I will redouble my practice plan. I had been practicing already and will be doing more since your recommendations. I will buy some more FP100c and E100G. The FP 100c film comes in two sizes with the small size being pretty affordable, relatively. The 4x5 size, packed for the US market is wacky expensive. I think I will order up more packs of the small size for experimenting and proofing. Once upon a time I used this camera, 4x5 Sinar F and Ektichrome a lot to shoot projects. But then we started hiring pro's to shoot the photos and I concentrated more on practicing architecture. What photography I did do was digital. I had the camera and gear so in these days of tight cash we decided I should shoot this in large format. I will certainly have my digital cameras with me Nikon D200's with multiple lenses and believe it or not if I have the settings right they seem to match the E100g reasonably closely. In spot meter mode they give me the same exposures as my hand held light meter pretty consistently. With the digital I can adjust the color temperature better for the artificial light. I knew this was going to be a more rigorous process but what we were not prepared for and much to my surprise was the implosion in the film industry. The last I time shot with this camera was 5 years ago so the film world changed a lot in the meantime. I did my first scans of practice shots with the e100g last week and am moderately happy. Need to get the workflow down to a process. I am just glad my lab is still processing e6 and the quality is good. Wet scanning is a bit of work reminds me a little of being in the darkroom. The biggest difference is that when you finish shooting with an architectural pro working with 50K of digital gear you know exactly what the shots look like when you leave the site. Sure they will still do post production but you have seen the shots on a good size monitor. I won't know for a week or so until I get the films back. That used to be SOP but isn't anymore in this highly digital age. But when all goes right I will be able to make 24x36 prints of these images something I just can't do from my digital cameras. Of course publishing these photos into a high quality book like we plan to do would have been cost prohibitive 10 years ago. Again many thanks!!!.