Is this subject brightness range impossible for slide film?

[loccdor]

I was using Provia 100F. You can see the curve below I applied to the image. It needed to be exposed at EV15 to keep the detail in the sky, but I think the wooded areas in the scene can't be more than EV11. Viewed in-person, these woods were quite rich and colorful, not dark.

If I apply a second curve to try to pull up the shadows a little more, I can make it more like you would see with your eyes, but the gradation becomes harsh and odd looking.

If I'm out shooting slide film, are there things that can be done to improve the image from a scene like this? Or is this just something that's just going to be better on negative? Should I be carrying some kind of adjustable square neutral density filter than I can darken the sky with? Will that make the shot look unnatural? Thanks for your ideas.

 

[koraks]

If I'm out shooting slide film, are there things that can be done to improve the image from a scene like this?

Use a graduated neutral density filter.

The SBR does indeed far exceed what slide film will generally capture. Back when it was still available, Fuji Astia would have been your best shot at something this, although this particular scene would have been beyond its reach as well.

apply a second curve to try to pull up the shadows a little more, I can make it more like you would see with your eyes, but the gradation becomes harsh and odd looking.

If you're digitally processing and presenting this, there may be something you could do. Slide film tends to retain some differentiation even in deep shadow areas. You could make two scans of the same negative; one exposed for the sky, one for the shadow area in the foreground. Then apply adjustment curves to both parts separately, and blend them back into a single image, using selective masking. You can get a reasonably natural-looking result this way, provided the original slide has sufficient color information in the shadows.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Negative film probably will give you a little more leeway, but you still need a graduated neutral density filter for this kind of shot. The current shot won't be able to bring up the darker areas without getting a lot of color noise regardless how you scan. You can't get blood from a turnip.

 

[koraks]

Negative film probably will give you a little more leeway, but you still need a graduated neutral density filter for this kind of shot.

Color negative film will capture this OK without filter if exposure is set judiciously.

 

[gary mulder]

I've used a lot of 4x5" slide film in the past. But never found a satisfactory way to deal with high contrasts. Solutions have their own drawbacks. Graduated neutral density filter is not always invisible in the result. A polar filter quickly exaggerates the colors. Underexposed parts have an annoying blue cast. Which is very difficult to remove from a scan. Maybe you have some shadow details but the color is disappointing. Eventually I stopped using slide film and started using negative color film. Which also has the advantage that it can print analogue in the darkroom but scans with difficulty.

 

[Trail Images]

I only use MF & LF slide film. Was a Velvia 50 user only until it went beyond readily finding it. Using Ektachrome E-100 now.
Slide film exposure latitude is extremely narrow as we all know. ND grads and Reverse grads go a long way to improving the exposure balance, but mostly if the scene is split with sky and landmass. In post processing I use the NIK Neutral Graduated Filter and it does a very good job of helping balance the latitude.
However, the deep shadows if not exposed in the field with "some detail" it almost always falls to the dreaded NOISE issues. And yes, there are decent noise reducers but less than perfect.
In the end I accept the good and bad with slide film knowing it's not perfect.
EDIT: to minimize the failed outings I only photograph in sunrise or sunset cycles watching closely for lower contrast timing.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Ignore the following if you are viewing your slides by projection, but if you are scanning...

For stationary subjects you could take two shots on slide film, one exposed for the sky and the other exposed for the lower half. Use a tripod. The two shots can be merged in editing software. It is a lot of trouble. Sorry to say, but scenes like this are more easily photographed with a digital camera. :-(

If you want a slide to be projected, then the graduated neutral density filter is probably the best solution.

Will someone who is better at calculating exposures say what "density" of graduated filter would be required? I get confused talking about the strength of neutral density filters.

 

[Alan9940]

Though it's expensive, I'm with @runswithsizzers and would take two shots exposed accordingly, then combine later in post.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Chromes are hard with shadows when you have a sky. This is Velvia 50 4x5. No filters. See the shadow area on the right and bottom left. I tried pulling it up when editing the scan (Epson V850; then Lightroom original). But only got color noise. It's the nature of the beast. I probably underexposed it as well a third or half a stop. That didn't help.

 

[Trail Images]

Ignore the following if you are viewing your slides by projection, but if you are scanning...

For stationary subjects you could take two shots on slide film, one exposed for the sky and the other exposed for the lower half. Use a tripod. The two shots can be merged in editing software. It is a lot of trouble. Sorry to say, but scenes like this are more easily photographed with a digital camera. :-(

If want a slide to be projected, then the graduated neutral density filter is probably the best solution.

Will someone who is better at calculating exposures say what "density" of graduated filter would be required? I get confused talking about the strength of neutral density filters.

Yes, very good point. That was an item I did not touch upon and use it often for various reasons including exposure latitude issues. Merging works, but as you stated, can be challenging and take some effort. But truly another way as a work around.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Ignore the following if you are viewing your slides by projection, but if you are scanning...

For stationary subjects you could take two shots on slide film, one exposed for the sky and the other exposed for the lower half. Use a tripod. The two shots can be merged in editing software. It is a lot of trouble. Sorry to say, but scenes like this are more easily photographed with a digital camera. :-(

If want a slide to be projected, then the graduated neutral density filter is probably the best solution.

Will someone who is better at calculating exposures say what "density" of graduated filter would be required? I get confused talking about the strength of neutral density filters.

Two stops (.6), three (.9) if it;s really contrasty. Mainly soft edge. Hard edge works on ocean horizons.

 

[Trail Images]

But only got color noise.

Exactly. I fight that even knowing it's possible when exposing scenes.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Though it's expensive, I'm with @runswithsizzers and would take two shots exposed accordingly, then combine later in post.

When I shoot medium format I usually bracket +1 and -1. I;ve never tried scanning two and combining in post. Does that actually work for film, leaving aside movement?

 

[Chan Tran]

Since what you were trying to manipulate is with digital so if your objective is to get a good digital image then shoot digital. If you were to shoot the slide and show it as it is on a light table or project it then you can use graduated filter.

 

[Trail Images]

When I shoot medium format I usually bracket +1 and -1. I;ve never tried scanning two and combining in post. Does that actually work for film, leaving aside movement?

Alan, I use only slide film and scan to make digital outputs. With that said I merge or combine if you will images often. Most time for making a two or three image panoramic. Usually that is not an exposure issue. But you can surely expose for vertical issues of exposure in a scene and combined them. If I get a chance today I'll post one I just finished yesterday.

 

[Vaughn]

Since what you were trying to manipulate is with digital so if your objective is to get a good digital image then shoot digital. If you were to shoot the slide and show it as it is on a light table or project it then you can use graduated filter.

Or...find and photograph scenes compatible with one's tools and film.

Or accept the challenge. Great way to expand one's knowledge.

 

[gary mulder]

Or...find and photograph scenes compatible with one's tools and film.

The right tool for the job or the right job for the tool ?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

In field pre-exposure with an ExpoDisc. Did it years ago, and although I didn't pursue it, it looked promising.

 

[Chan Tran]

Or...find and photograph scenes compatible with one's tools and film.

I choose this and I don't shoot film in low light without tripod. I don't use film faster than ISO160. No longer that a bad image is better than none.

 

[Trail Images]

When I shoot medium format I usually bracket +1 and -1. I;ve never tried scanning two and combining in post. Does that actually work for film, leaving aside movement?

Alan, here was the example I was talking about. I can tell you I have been to this location more than a few times trying to get the scene information to put this together. I will also say the end result is still lacking with some NOISE in the darker brush. Not a by chance scene at all.
I found a 4 foot barrel cactus quite sometime ago and planned a sunburst take over the cactus. After previous failures I was able to get enough exposure latitude to blend the images in PS. To get exact positioning I'd taken the GPS coordinates when I found the rare very TALL barrel cactus. I use Google Earth Pro and The Photographers Ephermeris to plot the exact event time and sunrise angle. In the field I used a compass to plot the sunrise angle spot and placed the camera behind the cactus crown. For the sunburst I used a HiTech 3 stop reverse ND. The sunburst had a few flares that I cloned out in PS.
The two exposures and than the PS blending.