Exposing and developing for sunny and cloudy...I'm thinking about using two cameras.

I have been mulling this over for a while. I shoot mostly family shots, some indoors some outdoors, bright sun, deep clouds and shade...all on the same roll.
I tend to just shoot at something slightly less than box speed (HP5+ or Tri-X, Arista 200) and develop with a wee bit more dev time. That USUALLY results in a nice negative that prints great using a grade 2 filter.
HOWEVER...the bright day shots don't turn out great to print...and I'm left with making a decision as to how to develop for the majority of the images. Rarely do I go outside and finish off a roll in one day which would make this really easy to figure out.


So that brings me to my point; I think I'm going to just use two cameras and have one loaded for sunny conditions (shooting at one or two stops over ASA and souping at a % less than stock dev time) and one for cloudy / shade conditions, which would be about box speed and dev'd +20% time which I already know I like.

The other alternative would be to change film rolls mid-roll and that seems like it would get confusing and lead to errors.

 

Yeah..trouble is, I like shooting 35mm except for this one tiny little thing. I already have multiple Trip 35s (my favorite camera) but only one Nikon FE2 (my second favorite.)

 

Holy crap I don't believe it! I just snagged another FE2 in good shape for $98.00 from ebay.

 

I guess I didn't come out and say it, I thought it was inferred but for me, that's definitely not true.

That yields "savable" negatives, not great negatives. I want negatives that I don't have to monkey with to get a decent print. I know (for example with Double X) I can get that by shooting box speed and developing D96 for 20% longer than recommended time. I know that that method (if shot in cloudy, overcast, shady conditions) will yield a great looking print with grade 2 filter. Beautiful distribution of tones..whites white, blacks black...shadows and highlights where they need to be, midtones where I like them.

I guess my experience is that box speed + box time doesn't yield what I like. (And Kodak themselves says that box is just a "starting point" so I guess that they agree also.

 

hahaha, I actually had a Med format camera and removable backs and it didn't float my boat. I like 35mm

 

Actually I never have.
Does it act differently than other films? Does it not follow the same sort of construct; expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights?

 

Yes, I do. I certainly see a difference in super contrasty days and cloudy days and exposure/dev times. I know that I can rescue prints by printing with a grade 5 or a grade 00 but I don't want to. I want to print as easily and with as good a looking prints as I can. It's a pleasure to print a print that has the right amount of contrast and density in the neg and not have to burn to get the highlights in or whatever. I want to leave that stuff for when I want to be creative, not because my neg isn't good enough. In any case, I snagged another FE2 body in good shape for 98.00 as I said and so that's what I'll do when I won't be finishing a roll quickly.

 

So you're saying that no matter what conditions I shoot in; sunny beach, cloudy, rainy, the film will have just the right amount of density so prints to start taking 2 minutes each and the right amount of contrast so that I don't have to use a grade 5 filter or a 00 filter...they just magically print about grade 2 or 2.5?

If that was the case, everyone would use this film or every maker would be making this magical film.

 

It probably would, but maybe more confusing and prone to error.

 

About the larger format?
I want to shoot 35mm though.

In any case, I already snagged another camera that will work for my needs. As much as possible I'll stick to the plan of shooting two cameras...one for overcast, cloudy, shady, rainy low contrast days, and one for bright, sunny contrasty cloudless days.

 

I didn't think of that...good idea.