New to film! Excited, confused, need help!

hellosnails · May 10, 2017

Hi everyone

Fairly new to film photography. I have never taken courses on photography, and I'm fairly well versed in exposure/aperture/ss/iso, etc.

However, coming from digital (and all the corners it lets you cut with Auto ISO), I'm beginning to get confused with the effects of pushing/pulling (in camera and in development) and how it affects the image.

In the few rolls I've shot, I grab either some Portra 400/800 or some Lomo.

I shoot street, in a city, so I dodge bright sun and dark shadows constantly. I've come up with what I see as the most variable I would account for. What are the effects of all these variables?

1.) 400 @ 400, developed at 400
2.) 400 @ 800, developed at 400
3.) 400 @ 400, developed at 800
4.) 400 @ 800, developed at 800

5.) 800 @ 800, developed at 400
6.) 800 @ 400, developed at 800
7.) 800 @ 400, developed at 400

5.) 400 @ 200, developed at 400
6.) 400 @ 200, developed at 200
7.) 400 @ 400, developed at 200

Am I completely overthinking this? I only worry that, because I like to shoot fast (1/500 of a sec for quick moments, with a relatively big DOF), I push the film from 400 to 800. My shots seem to be underexposed, flat and murkey with green tones.

What would these variables have on a film like Portra?

Thank you!!

Leigh B · May 10, 2017

Hi snails, and Welcome Aboard.

hellosnails said:
Am I completely overthinking this?

Yes, by several orders of magnitude.

Shoot one film at one speed and develop normally for that speed.
Use only one developer, and follow the manufacturer's instructions.
After five or ten years you'll know enough to start experimenting.

Learn to use your shutter speed and aperture to control exposure.

I've been shooting film for over 60 years. I've only pushed a roll on a couple of occasions.
Even then, I could have gotten usable negatives with normal exposure/development.

- Leigh

keenmaster486 · May 10, 2017

Hmm, for just starting out I would recommend sticking with box speed (i.e. Don't push or pull) until you can achieve great results that way, and then experiment more. I see no need for you to push 400 to 800 if you already have 800 in the box.

howardpan · May 10, 2017

Like you, I like to think (too much according to others). I recommend that you pick up a book called the Art of Photography by Bruce Barnbaum. You will understand the subject much better once you are up to speed on the background.

Much of what I write below is based on my understanding of black and white photography. I presume the same ideas extend to color photography. Some people say pushing is using extra development compensate for under exposure. In fact, development only controls the contrast and cannot truly compensate for under exposure. Exposure determines what details are captured in the shadows. Development determines where the highlights fall on the negative. By controlling this range of shadows to highlights, you make tradeoffs that impact the tones. At the end, the negative is an intermediate step to help you produce the final print.

Photo Engineer · May 10, 2017

Welcome to APUG.

Pushing or pulling color is not advised. You risk color crossover with changes in development time. This can cause color changes that cannot be corrected.

Stick with the standard development time and used + or - one stop and you will get good results. Since B&W effectively one layer (there are more, but they don't change colors), the rules for B&W and color are different. So, in post #4 above, the comment "I presume....." is not really correct.

PE

Leigh B · May 10, 2017

howardpan said:
In fact, development only controls the contrast and cannot truly compensate for under exposure. Exposure determines what details are captured in the shadows. Development determines where the highlights fall on the negative.

That's correct.

Development does not impact the shadow detail (the thinnest densities in the negative), rather only the highlights.

The range of densities over a range of subject brightness is the film "gamma".
That's the value controlled by development as shown in film datasheets.
For example (ACROS in Fujidol):

Note the values of Gamma ranging from 0.45 to 0.68 depending on development time.

- Leigh

Photo Engineer · May 10, 2017

Leigh, you must be clear that this only works for B&W.

PE

Dwayne Martin · May 10, 2017

I've been excited and confused about film for years now.....

Leigh B · May 10, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
Leigh, you must be clear that this only works for B&W.

Hi PE,

That's certainly true.

I thought we were talking about B&W.

- Leigh

howardpan · May 10, 2017

That's my fault. The original poster asked about color film, and I only have experience with BW film so I didn't realize the multiple color dyes will not be affected by longer development time uniformly.

Michael Firstlight · May 10, 2017

howardpan said:
Like you, I like to think (too much according to others). I recommend that you pick up a book called the Art of Photography by Bruce Barnbaum. You will understand the subject much better once you are up to speed on the background.

Much of what I write below is based on my understanding of black and white photography. I presume the same ideas extend to color photography. Some people say pushing is using extra development compensate for under exposure. In fact, development only controls the contrast and cannot truly compensate for under exposure. Exposure determines what details are captured in the shadows. Development determines where the highlights fall on the negative. By controlling this range of shadows to highlights, you make tradeoffs that impact the tones. At the end, the negative is an intermediate step to help you produce the final print.

I second the book Art of Photography by Bruce Barnbaum. I have 45 years experience both analog and digital and this is the best modern book that dives deep and clear across a wide spectrum of both analog and digital with great coverage of things like the Zone system, processing, analog/digital eqivalents/differences, and more..

LAG · May 11, 2017

hellosnails said:
Am I completely overthinking this?

Yes, you are. And your list is a clear example of it

hellosnails said:
What would these variables have on a film like Portra?

Have nothing to do with pushing/pulling ...

1. | 2. | 6. (800) | 5. (400) Normal development (N) changing exp. times (EI-x)

1. ... at all
2. (EI -1) colour film underexposed (weak shadows ...)
6. & 5. (EI +1) colour film overexposed (weak lights ...)

3. | 5. (800) | 7. (400) Normal exposure (EI) but changing dev. times (N-x)

3. (EI) N+1 colour film overdeveloped (weak shadows ...)
5. & 7. (EI) N-1 colour film underdeveloped (weak lights ...)

Pushing & Pulling:

4. | 7. (800) | 6. (400): (EI-x) Compensating effect (N-x)

4. (EI -1) N+1 pushing colour film: underexposed & overdeveloped (high contrast ...)
7. & 6. (EI +1) N-1 pulling colour film: overexposed & underdeveloped (low contrast ...)

Colour will be affected of course, in any (EI-x), (N-x) & (EI-x & N-x) combination

Best!

hellosnails · May 11, 2017

Thank you to all!! i'm going to get the book ASAP.

I guess I'm just excited to try new things, and trying to find the best ways to shoot fast speeds, the most versatile way possible.

Thank you again!

bvy · May 11, 2017

hellosnails said:
Thank you to all!! i'm going to get the book ASAP.

I think you can start shooting even without a book. But pick it up anyway.

Coming from digital, you're going to find color negative film much more forgiving in terms of exposure. Blow highlights with a digital camera, and they're gone forever. Film, no problem (within reason). Underexposure is more of a problem with film than over-, so err on the side of accidentally overexposing. Take a look at this link; it's not Portra, but the idea extends to Portra and your other options:
https://carmencitafilmlab.com/how-exposure-affects-film/

One caveat: We're talking about negative film here, specifically color negative film. Slide film (like Provia or Velvia which produce a positive image) require careful metering and exposure. Some might even say that slide film is less forgiving than digital.

Welcome to APUG. Happy shooting.

Photo Engineer · May 11, 2017

The book, however excellent it may be, does not cover color.

You might try the book "Post Exposure" by Ctein.

PE

trendland · May 11, 2017

hellosnails said:
Thank you to all!! i'm going to get the book ASAP.

I guess I'm just excited to try new things, and trying to find the best ways to shoot fast speeds, the most versatile way possible.

Thank you again!

To make one thing clear (I saw a Video titled :10 things you shoun't Do with film)

As I saw this Video I could imagine things wich I would never thought aboud)

YOU CAN NOT PUSH YOUR FILM INTO
YOUR CAMERA.

So it is no way to switch (don't know what kind of camera you use-maybe an
older slr) to switch the botton of ASA/DIN with the film you have in use.

Today it is named ISO - be aware of.
This is done only one time to calibrate
your camera to each film.

with regards

trendland · May 11, 2017

hellosnails said:
Thank you to all!! i'm going to get the book ASAP.

I guess I'm just excited to try new things, and trying to find the best ways to shoot fast speeds, the most versatile way possible.

Thank you again!

To make one thing clear (I saw a Video titled :10 things you shoun't Do with film)

As I saw this Video I could imagine things wich I would never thought aboud)

YOU CAN NOT PUSH YOUR FILM INTO
YOUR CAMERA.

So it is no way to switch (don't know what kind of camera you use-maybe an
older slr) to switch the botton of ASA/DIN with the film you have in use.

Today it is named ISO - be aware of.
This is done only one time to calibrate
your camera to each film.

with regards

Sirius Glass · May 11, 2017

Welcome to APUG

Stick to box speed. Most people will never do all the research and testing that the manufacturers do. Other than PE there are few here that know more than the manufacturers.

jernejk · May 11, 2017

x @ y developed at z

Think of it like this: x is the sensor speed. Your digital camera sensor in reality has a "native" speed (usually ISO 100 I believe). The same is with film, it has an inherent speed, which we call "box speed".

"@ y developed at z" part, with your digital camera is a single step process. When you switch to iso 200 or 400 or whatever on digital, you expose the sensor to the light at half (fourth, eight...) of the time and tell the camera to amplify the sensor signal. The amplification is kinda like development. You will get more noise when you shoot at higher iso than sensor native iso.

With film it's actually the same. You expose at reduced time, and then "amplify" with longer development time. If you look at the negative, you see that bright scenes get dark, right? Without "amplification" - longer development time, bright scene would not register dark on film, which means your prints or scans would look bad.

MattKing · May 11, 2017

jernejk said:
x @ y developed at z

Think of it like this: x is the sensor speed. Your digital camera sensor in reality has a "native" speed (usually ISO 100 I believe). The same is with film, it has an inherent speed, which we call "box speed".

"@ y developed at z" part, with your digital camera is a single step process. When you switch to iso 200 or 400 or whatever on digital, you expose the sensor to the light at half (fourth, eight...) of the time and tell the camera to amplify the sensor signal. The amplification is kinda like development. You will get more noise when you shoot at higher iso than sensor native iso.

With film it's actually the same. You expose at reduced time, and then "amplify" with longer development time. If you look at the negative, you see that bright scenes get dark, right? Without "amplification" - longer development time, bright scene would not register dark on film, which means your prints or scans would look bad.

I'd be careful with this approach.
Developing longer does not significantly increase the film sensitivity. It does increase the contrast, because it makes the mid-tones and highlights lighter/brighter while leaving the shadows dark.
Turning up the amplification on a sensor does increase the sensitivity.
In the film case, you are more likely to lose detail in the shadows (with negative film).
In the digital case, you are more likely to lose detail in the highlights.

hellosnails · May 11, 2017

So how could guys like Garry Winogrand keep his speed high and shoot at things like 3200... is it because he was shooting B&W? I'm assuming thats' a huge factor

keenmaster486 · May 11, 2017

Probably because Garry Winogrand was shooting high speed B&W film (as in >800 ISO), which is much more easily obtainable than high speed color film, and is easier to push to higher speeds in the development process.

Pushing color film is not impossible, it's just harder than with B&W.

EDIT: because you get color shifts and stuff.

MattKing · May 11, 2017

hellosnails said:
So how could guys like Garry Winogrand keep his speed high and shoot at things like 3200... is it because he was shooting B&W? I'm assuming thats' a huge factor

Absolutely. Although I think an EI of 1200 with Tri-X was much more common for him. He liked to be able to shoot at 1/1000 of a second whenever possible.
And remember, his preference was for really bold and contrasty images. Subtle tonal gradation isn't something he appears to have valued particularly.
So dark shadows that lack detail and grain and relatively high contrast - all the consequences of under-exposure and "push developing" - appealed to him.
He also used 28mm and 35mm lenses a lot. Harsh contrast and wide-angle perspective work well if you are looking to emulate his "style".
Take a look at his colour work if you would like to see something a bit different in some ways.

hellosnails · May 11, 2017

That's super helpful. I myself am not looking for particularly perfect imagery. I guess it's all about experimenting. The one problem, though I seem to be running into is like this image of mine... (if it attaches)

the green cast/flat/muddy quality is something I'm trying to stray away from.

So, if I picked up an ISO 800 speed film, and shot at 800, all else equal, should give me standard results? Does the image from above look like I should have left it in the developer longer?

MattKing · May 11, 2017

Most likely, the image you tried to upload is bigger than the 850 x 850 pixel limitation for APUG. Resize and then retry.

New to film! Excited, confused, need help!

hellosnails

Leigh B

keenmaster486

howardpan

Photo Engineer

Leigh B

Photo Engineer

Dwayne Martin

Leigh B

howardpan

Michael Firstlight

LAG

hellosnails

bvy

Photo Engineer

trendland

trendland

Sirius Glass

jernejk

MattKing

Moderator

hellosnails

keenmaster486

MattKing

Moderator

hellosnails

MattKing

Moderator

New to film! Excited, confused, need help!

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency