Maybe you already said it before, but I am a bit confused. You did meter at ISO 100 with both cameras. Did you also get the exact same aperture and shutter speed in both cameras?
It's using a 10 stop wedge starting with B+F then -4 to +5 reading an 18% grey card.
I think he's talking about the EI based on his interpretation of the results, not the speed the film was shot at. It would be pretty hard to purposely shoot film at an odd EI like 91 or 27 anyway.
I meant is it getting its results from a spot of the negative or an overall take on the negative.
I don't see a 3-4 stop difference between the negatives you showed.
PyrocatHD is a bit too compensating to be a good choice for a testing developer. It's very difficult to overdevelop with it.
Also, an RB67 was used with a 50mm lens to take rather close images of whatever that is in the 120 film. The bellows would be extended enough to need compensation.
Correct me if I'm wrong .....
@Evan_Mathis is exposing film to a number of different light levels and then developing that film.
After that, @Evan_Mathis is measuring film densities and plotting the results.
After that @Evan_Mathis is analyzing the plotted result and, based on the analysis, coming to a conclusion about what EI to use going forward to obtain a desired result.
that's a super valid question and the answer is no... I meter normal with aperture priority targeting +5 from the smallest fstop because I find aperture to be more reliable than shutter speed. then i work my way up to +4 from normal by increasing shutter speed once i hit the widest aperture.
For the 50mm Sekor C it tops out at f32, going to 4.5 so I'm metering for normal at f5.6
For the Voightlander, it only goes to f22, so I'm metering for normal at f4.
The rollercoaster of a film curve can't be from the film or development. There an issue with the exposure data. For the results to mean anything, the data has to be reliable.
Ha, you're absolutely right, and I think I've found the issue: there was a bit of packing styrofoam on the underside of the densitometer reader lens. I was trying to figure out why my readings were so inconsistent. I discovered it when I went to read the calibration wedge that came with it, and * that * was inconsistent and checked the underside of the reader and there it was.
View attachment 416291
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?