hoffy
Member
Hi,
I shot my first roll of Velvia over the last month or so. When I loaded, I was with a few old hands, who told me to under expose by around half a stop. I decided to trust the meter in the camera (maybe this was my mistake?) and compensate by 1/3rd of a stop (to play it safe) and set the camera manually. Both shots were also done with a Cokin ND8 graduate.
This is what I came up with:
Shot one - 1.6 secs @ F29
Shot Two - 2 secs @ F29
I would like some advice. Based on the water, would you still call these under exposed? Would have I been better spot metering on the water and then compensating based on that? Also, the scan and the negs seem to have a cast on the water. Would exposure compensation help to fix this? Or is this a separate issue?
Any advice or comments are more then welcome!
Cheers
I shot my first roll of Velvia over the last month or so. When I loaded, I was with a few old hands, who told me to under expose by around half a stop. I decided to trust the meter in the camera (maybe this was my mistake?) and compensate by 1/3rd of a stop (to play it safe) and set the camera manually. Both shots were also done with a Cokin ND8 graduate.
This is what I came up with:
Shot one - 1.6 secs @ F29

Shot Two - 2 secs @ F29

I would like some advice. Based on the water, would you still call these under exposed? Would have I been better spot metering on the water and then compensating based on that? Also, the scan and the negs seem to have a cast on the water. Would exposure compensation help to fix this? Or is this a separate issue?
Any advice or comments are more then welcome!
Cheers