First Roll of Film - How did I do?

[usfpaul82]

Hello all. I am new here and I just got into film. I picked up a Nikon FE that appears to be in pretty good condition, I did change the light seals and replace the eyepiece. I just shot, developed and scanned my first ever roll of film. I would like to get some feedback on what I think are my best shots. I am completely open to any type of feedback, good or bad.

A little about my gear, I used my Nikon FE with 50mm 1.8AIS lens. TriX 400 film. I developed with d-76 1:1 at the recommeed development times. This was all a first for me. I also scanned the negatives using a Epson v600 scanner.

I am not really sure if my exposure is correct with these. Maybe they seem a little dark? I shot these early afternoon with scattered clouds. I used strictly Auto mode (aperture priority) on the FE.

Thanks!
Paul

 

[Sirius Glass]

The exposures look good.

Welcome to APUG

 

[pentaxuser]

They look good to me as well. Perhaps if you tell us what you'd like to have achieved in each shot that you failed to achieve our comments can be better targeted

pentaxuser

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Very nice first attempts. Did you shoot at ISO 400? The darks are a little flat, at least on my monitor. You may want to try about 250-200 to open up your shadows a wee bit. Then of course, you may have to cut back a bit on development time. D-76 1+1 and Tri-X is a very nice combination, by the way!

 

[Kirks518]

I think the exposure looks just fine. Nice contrast for an overcast day.

Because it seems based on the thread title that you're looking for some critique. If I had to recommend an area that could use 'some' improvement, I'd say you're framing, especially with the people pics.

#1 - You cut off their feet. I would have gotten down lower, and included their feet.
#2 - Too much tree at the top, and only a small part of the dress hem. Again, lower angle would have taken care of that.
#3 - Your older daughter's feet again.

I realize there's more thinking before hitting the shutter when shooting film over the D-word, and we tend to concentrate sometimes more on the 'Am I getting the technical stuff right', and miss small bits of the artistic side of it (of which I need tons of improvement). But it will become 2nd nature with time, as long as we're aware of it.

But... those are all shots you should be proud of, and treasure! Beautiful family!

 

[removed account4]

great first roll !

seems like you know whatyou are doing
keep up the good work !
john

 

[MattKing]

Welcome to APUG - an excellent start.

The only one that looks dark to me is the third one, with the mother (?) and little girls.

The people in that scene are both relatively small in the frame and lit from behind (backlit). For those reasons, the metering was slightly fooled, being overly influenced by the light behind the people.

This is a perfect example of when you would want to override the meter's suggestions, by increasing the exposure somewhat. I would suggest either one stop, or slightly less if the background detail is particularly important to you.

 

[usfpaul82]

Thank you very much to everyone for the comments. It was a joy shooting the FE and getting through development, although a little nerve racking since it was my first time developing.

Just to answer a few things. Yes, they are my wife and daughters. I shot the TriX at ISO 400 on the camera. I agree framing could be a little better on the people. And I also agree with the backlight slightly influencing metering in the image with my wife.

Thanks again!

 

[Michael Guzzi]

Welcome to APUG!

That's a better first roll than mine, that's for sure! Other than minor framing issues they all look really good! My first and so far main camera is a close relative of yours, the FE2. Outstanding cameras they are.

Regarding the exposure I think you got a good balance here. If you had metered excluding the sky (using the exposure lock lever) it would have lightened the scene overall, and blown out the sky almost completely.

*Though I must say that scanning seems more forgiving of errors than wet printing. my early rolls scan OK but I must use some advanced wizardry on the darkroom to make them look their best. Main culprits are the excessive development, coupled with too optimistic (box) EI.

 

[OptiKen]

Impressive compositions

 

[HiHoSilver]

Best of Welcomes, Paul.

Bravo on a first try. Seriously. 'A big step & it looks excellent.

I'm a sucker for children w/ expressive faces, but the tree shot was killer.

I'm using almost the same kit (FE2, mostly HP5 film, used D76 alot, V600 also)

'Not savvy on the differences, if any for the FE vs FE2 metering, but its your basic center weighted meter. So whatever you want most perfectly exposed, put that element in the center of your (lovely) viewfinder when metering. A few hundred rolls from now, you'll have a feel for when to over-ride - as Matt says.

'Hope you enjoy it here as much as I have. Have Fun!

 

[Terry Breedlove]

They are a touch dark but nothing to bad and you can make some beautiful prints. When shooting people I will usually over expose my negatives a stop. I shoot mostly TRI-X and it is rated at 200 iso in my 35mm cameras and then I develop it normally. I suggest you try it and see what you think. Thank you of sharing the beautiful photos

 

[ced]

Great results for a first off bash, the problem of darkness could also be coming from the way the scanner analysed the crop.
Watch what is happening to the end points as there are 2 rows of histogram controls that may need to be adjusted then if you like you can tune the midtone slider to give your images the brightness you want.

 

[John51]

Way better than my first ever roll. Well done.

 

[usfpaul82]

anyone care to see shots from my second roll? I like to think these came out pretty nice.

 

[awty]

Yes very nice.
Great work.

 

[LAG]

Excuse me usfpaul82

Congratulations on your first ever roll! (sorry, i'm late) and the second one "ever" as well! Good news and bad news for you on my humble feedback.

Without a closer (and clean) view to the film itself, it's always hard to give a value judgement only by seeing the digital results, I mean, you are the only one who can tell, but analyzing your own negatives, never the scanned photographs! Is not valid reference at all (in my opinion). There is a lot of learning in that closer "reading".

Besides, knowing "beforehand" what kind of "output" you're looking for, will help you a lot to improve "both" ways.

Tri-X & D-76 know each other really well for many years. They are perfect for everything, generous (film) and gentle (developer). Bad news, they are not perfect for one simple thing, they are not the best combination "to learn". They are perfect for no mistakes, and you must go wrong.

Is not of much use being a "metering-master" if it then the film & chemical give you the invisible hand, without explanation.

Welcome

 

[Doc W]

I think the exposure looks just fine. Nice contrast for an overcast day.

Because it seems based on the thread title that you're looking for some critique. If I had to recommend an area that could use 'some' improvement, I'd say you're framing, especially with the people pics.

#1 - You cut off their feet. I would have gotten down lower, and included their feet.
#2 - Too much tree at the top, and only a small part of the dress hem. Again, lower angle would have taken care of that.
#3 - Your older daughter's feet again.

I realize there's more thinking before hitting the shutter when shooting film over the D-word, and we tend to concentrate sometimes more on the 'Am I getting the technical stuff right', and miss small bits of the artistic side of it (of which I need tons of improvement). But it will become 2nd nature with time, as long as we're aware of it.

But... those are all shots you should be proud of, and treasure! Beautiful family!

Regarding the feet, Kirk is right, but he is also wrong. Bottom line is that this is an aesthetic choice, not a hard rule. Personally, I like the missing feet but Kirk's comments are equally valid. You choose.

 

[tomfrh]

Lovely shots! And good exposures!

Get yourself an enlarger and have a go printing.