No matter what Kodak says

[Juan Valdenebro]

"No matter what Kodak says, film that's a stop underexposed and given normal development is still a stop underexposed".

John Hicks

What do you think?

 

[mshchem]

Sure it's still underexposed.

 

[BrianShaw]

Do you not agree?

 

[Chan Tran]

Yes 1 stop underexposed is underexposed. I do agree.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes 1 f/stop underexposed is underexposed. I do agree.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I think Kodak recommended something that's not the best option.
Why did Kodak do it?

 

[Vaughn]

If one does it on purpose, then it is exposed correctly.
And if you always do it, it becomes normal.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

For me, one stop less exposure would mean two stops underexposed with some films that I use.

 

[grat]

I think this thread is at least two stops under-contextualized.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

mshchem,

For me, one stop less exposure would mean two stops underexposed with some films that I use.

That's it.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I which situations, dear Photrio forum members, do you find underexposure without extended development the best option?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Could it be Kodak wanted images at EI800 not showing the very small grain growth that's common after the slight extended development required for a one-stop push?
Could it be they wanted unexperienced new photographers to think their Kodak materials were superior to those by other brands?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I think this thread is at least two stops under-contextualized.

We need to invert and stand on our heads when we develop film.

 

[cjbecker]

But overdeveloped creates more grain?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I which situations, dear Photrio forum members, do you find underexposure without extended development the best option?

No, never. I expose for box speed and meter without the sky in the meter's field of view and develop normally for the ambient temperature. I may adjust for the the Zone System or filters or both.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Could it be Kodak wanted images at EI800 not showing the very small grain growth that's common after the slight extended development required for a one-stop push?
Could it be they wanted unexperienced new photographers to think their Kodak materials were superior to those by other brands?

As a retired Kodak engineer, the answers to both questions are No and No.

 

[grat]

I which situations, dear Photrio forum members, do you find underexposure without extended development the best option?

When I underexpose one frame on a roll. One stop, can recover in post, but I can't tell you how. More than one stop-- Oh well.

 

[Sirius Glass]

When I underexpose one frame on a roll. One stop, can recover in post, but I can't tell you how. More than one stop-- Oh well.

That in f/stop less exposure is withing the range of exposure of the film.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

As a retired Kodak engineer, the answers to both questions are No and No.

Interesting answer, Sirius...
Do you think that recommendation is the best option?
If so, what's inferior in a bit longer development?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

When I underexpose one frame on a roll. One stop, can recover in post, but I can't tell you how. More than one stop-- Oh well.

Do you think that works equally well for all films and developers in all types of scene contrast?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Has any other brand recommended the same?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Do you think that works equally well for all films and developers in all types of scene contrast?

Yes, however the difference of one stop could be too much for some slide films since that could be out of the exposure range.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

One stop under based on what ? Is a $500 lens too expensive?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Do you think that works equally well for all films and developers in all types of scene contrast?

Changing exposure and development change the contrast.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Post #19 can be commented by others too...