Shooting Kodak ColorPlus 200 @ iso 160

[George Mann]

To maximize grain suppression. Anyone have any luck doing so?

EDIT: I suppose that I should have posted this inquiry in the exposure discussion sub-forum.

 

[MattKing]

Welcome to APUG.
Seems as good a sub-forum as any.
I don't know that you would see any significant difference adjusting your metering by just 1/3 a stop.
As Colorplus 200 is an "amateur" film, it is fairly high in saturation and contrast. So careful metering is probably more important than changing the EI.

 

[George Mann]

This particular film responds very well to grain suppression, yielding large differences in both clarity and resolution. Given how affordable it is, it would make sense to want to go to the lengths required to maximize it's potential.

 

[MattKing]

I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to when you use the phrase "grain suppression" in reference to a method or procedure. Are you referring to the effects that over-exposure can have with respect to contrast and saturation, and the resultant slightly more pastel appearance?
If so, it takes a lot more than 1/3 of a stop increase in exposure to bring those effects into being.

 

[George Mann]

grain suppression = minimizing apparent grain in the visual spectrum.

 

[markbarendt]

This particular film responds very well to grain suppression, yielding large differences in both clarity and resolution.

How?

 

[George Mann]

There is 3 places this needs to occur. During the original exposure, during development, and during the scanning process.

 

[George Mann]

How?

It's a bit complicated to explain, but easy enough to see.

 

[MattKing]

grain suppression = minimizing apparent grain in the visual spectrum.

So it isn't a particular technique. It is just the same goal some of us have been seeking for decades.
One third of a stop will not make any observable difference.

 

[George Mann]

One third of a stop will not make any observable difference.

Maybe, but I will soon find out.

 

[markbarendt]

There is 3 places this needs to occur. During the original exposure, during development, and during the scanning process.

It's a bit complicated to explain, but easy enough to see.

IME, avoiding underexposure definitely helps, extra exposure doesn't necessarily help or hurt with C41 films, the subject matter doesn't always cooperate. Minor adjustments of exposure as you suggested though IME are irrelevant to the end product.

Well exposed C41 films get their best results in the standard development regime. So as long as you get reasonable quality from the lab or follow the normal procedures well development is a non-issue.

As to scanning, the scanner and it's software can't change the graininess in the film itself.

Maybe, but I will soon find out.

Only if you have a lab that you can control all the variables in and you are shooting test targets.

Unless you work in film engineering for say Kodak you probably won't be able to come even close to seeing a difference, even then you probably wouldn't.

 

[George Mann]

Only if you have a lab that you can control all the variables in and you are shooting test targets.

I have one.

Unless you work in film engineering for say Kodak you probably won't be able to come even close to seeing a difference, even then you probably wouldn't.

Actually, the difference is readily seen just by viewing peoples results on Flickr!

 

[markbarendt]

Actually, the difference is readily seen just by viewing peoples results on Flickr!

George, it is great to see you asking questions about how to improve things.

Please understand that your faith in Flickr is misplaced.

 

[George Mann]

Please understand that your faith in Flickr is misplaced.

How so?

 

[Cholentpot]

Maybe, but I will soon find out.

That's the spirit! Play with your film, you got nothing to lose. I generally aim to over expose my film either way. I don't trust my meter all that much.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG

There is no advantage to shoot color film at anything other than box speed.

 

[George Mann]

That's the spirit! Play with your film, you got nothing to lose. I generally aim to over expose my film either way. I don't trust my meter all that much.

The meter in my Nikon F90x is calibrated for slide film.

 

[George Mann]

Welcome to APUG

There is no advantage to shoot color film at anything other than box speed.

Actually, there is a wealth of evidence that proves otherwise!

 

[pentaxuser]

Actually, there is a wealth of evidence that proves otherwise!

Can you give us at least some of sources of your wealth of evidence? I must admit to not having seen any of this but I am open to looking at any evidence.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG

There is no advantage to shoot color film at anything other than box speed.

Actually, there is a wealth of evidence that proves otherwise!

I strongly suggest that you talk to PE [Photo Engineer] who actually did research and development work on film and developers at Kodak. Do not believe all the things posted on internet or written in photo magazines by the wanttabe's.

Black & white film can handle up to 12 to 14 stop range of brightness. Color print film which includes Kodak ColorPlus 200 can also handle a wide latitude of exposure, but not nearly as much as black & white film. Slide film has a narrow exposure latitude, on the order of about plus or minus a stop.

 

[markbarendt]

How so?

The pix on Flickr are not part of a controlled science project and IMO most posters are like you in that they don't understand how it all works.

Given that there are no controls and disclosure on the variables, and there are a lot of variables, you can't make meaningful comparison.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Actually, there are several people here that worked at Kodak and other film manufacturing companies.

 

[MattKing]

Do you plan to optically print your ColorPlus film?
If not, and scanning is part of your workflow, then the discussion is off topic for APUG and, more importantly in general, the scanning part of the process will add so many variables as to make analysis of a 1/3 stop variation in exposure essentially meaningless.
Flickr is great for seeing how people are inspired, but it it doesn't tell much of anything about the technical realities of film.
HOWEVER...
If you find that the combination of using an EI of 160, your equipment, your metering technique, your development routine or your lab's development routine, your choice of subjects and your preferences for output gives you results that you like/meet your needs than I would encourage you to use that combination!

 

[markbarendt]

Flickr is great for seeing how people are inspired,

That is one of Flickr's great strengths.

 

[Anon Ymous]

While it is true that granularity in C41 films decreases while density increases, IME other factors, like bumping the contrast affect granularity, or the way it is perceived much more. For the record, I've shot Color Plus 200 at both 200 and 100 and have to say that it's quite grainy any way you shoot it. A 1/3 of a stop increase in exposure will not make any significant difference and if you really want to see what the difference is, then shoot the same scene at EI 200 and 100.