• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Massive Spectral Density Comparison of Films

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Keith;

The lamp in Kodak spectrophotometric work is set to a common output value. We derive everything from that very highly stabilzed and calibrated light source; however release speed is tested at the correct degrees Kelvin. Color speed tests are also done at the correct degrees Kelvin and at each segment of the spectrum, R/G/B, so you can be assured that you are getting daylight and tungsten products balanced correctly.

As for the example above, the best safelight is in the white (clear) area to the right of center, and that is how to pick a safelight for a given product.

Now, some additional information. Let us suppose that a green sensitizer causes low contrast in the green region but you have high contrast in the blue region. Your image will be mismatched in color/tone scale. This is rare but does happen. Therefore a full working wedge spectrogram used for engineering purposes looks like the one I posted above. A line drawing will not show you contrast as a function of wavelength, just speed. Both are important, but speed vs wavelength is only useful if the photo engineer has done his job and equalized contrasts.

IMHO, for the true professional photographer, a photo of a MacBeth color checker is sufficient to reveal the good and bad points of a given film product.

Peter;

I'm not sure how to reply to your comment. Of course it is correct, but seems to be a non-sequitur in the context of the preceeding posts. Can you elucidate? Thanks.

PE
 

Ray Rogers

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
1,543
Location
Earth
Format
Multi Format
Another project from the depths of the lah-bor-a-tree on the bayou.....

-----
???

Looks like the data went Pooffff!
Anyone know were it went?

Ray
 

Ray Rogers

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
1,543
Location
Earth
Format
Multi Format
I just checked, it opened fine for me. It would be difficult for words to disappear from a Pdf file, it's a type of vector graphic.

I would suspect your PDF reader......


Sorry, my bad?

Not the pdf... but the links to kodak web pages.

I did not think to try Ilford etc. but it looks like the kodak links do not go all the way home.

Yes, Fuji and Ilford are healthy,
But Kodak seems to be MIA!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP

Paul Verizzo

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
1,648
Location
Round Rock, TX
Format
35mm
Sorry, my bad?

Not the pdf... but the links to kodak web pages.

I did not think to try Ilford etc. but it looks like the kodak links do not go all the way home.

Yes, Fuji and Ilford are healthy,
But Kodak seems to be MIA!

Oh, it's not "the data" that is missing, it has "dead links."

Amazing as I wrote that, what, a month ago? Look up the product, then. You won't find movie films at kodak.com, BTW. Google is your friend.
 

Steve Sherman

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Messages
548
Location
Connecticut
Format
ULarge Format

Might this be backwards? My way of thinking, SS film development would produce a sharp rise into the straight line with a long soft shoulder
 

dancqu

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
3,649
Location
Willamette V
Format
Medium Format
I'll be doing some tests at ~325 in the coming weeks.

A nice change of pace from the too often IR posts. From
ages gone by there are photos where depth is dramaticaly
emphasized by UV fading of far distant portions of the
scene. Dan
 

Ray Rogers

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
1,543
Location
Earth
Format
Multi Format
A nice change of pace from the too often IR posts. From
ages gone by there are photos where depth is dramaticaly
emphasized by UV fading of far distant portions of the
scene. Dan

Dan,

I do not follow, could you expand on this a bit?
Ray
 

Ray Rogers

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
1,543
Location
Earth
Format
Multi Format
There seems to be a mixup of threads here, no?

I think I interrupted an on-going conversation when I discovered the death of your Kodak links.

Beyond that I am not sure.

And, I was wondering what Dan had in mind when he wrote:

From ages gone by there are photos where depth is dramaticaly
emphasized by UV fading of far distant portions of the
scene.

hummm... I see, it's not an issue of conservation of old photographs, (fade)
but one of image-wise exposue of fresh film
to UV+vis
w/o use of UV filter,

and how such images appear.

Sorry....
 

Marco B

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
2,736
Location
The Netherla
Format
Multi Format
Quote:
Originally Posted by ath View Post
When comparing spectral sensitivity it is important how they were derived. There are at least two "standard" ways to plot the graphs. Based on the same data they look completely different.
Compare the spectrae at page 3 for these two datasheets (german and english version of the same film, Ilford Delta 100): http://web.archive.org/web/199806101...00_Delta_G.pdf and http://web.archive.org/web/199806101.../100_Delta.pdf
Interesting. Other than I just stuck with English language data sheets, I don't know what to say. Why would Ilford use and publish two different methods?

Interesting. Other than I just stuck with English language data sheets, I don't know what to say. Why would Ilford use and publish two different methods?

Looking at these coarse graphs, I have the distinct feeling they may just not be very accurate. I am always very wary of simple curved graphs not showing original measured data points, as the data may simply have been drawn freehand through a very limited set of points.

The general "look" of these graphs between 450nm and 650 is about the same. It may well be that there aren't actually any true measured data points below 450 nm, and one guy decided to extrapolate the curve as in the German document, suggesting a high UV and blue sensitivity, while another person decided to drop the curve to 0 as in the English document...
 

dancqu

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
3,649
Location
Willamette V
Format
Medium Format
Dan, I do not follow, could you expand on this a bit? Ray

Passing light in the red and longer wave lengths
reduces distant haze while while passing light in
blue and shorter wave lengths increases haze.

Most films have good blue and UV sensitivity.
Haze accentuates depth differently than
depth of field. More realistic IMO. Dan