Vision 3 200T - looking for ways to improve.

Signs & fragments

A
Signs & fragments

  • 2
  • 0
  • 18
Summer corn, summer storm

D
Summer corn, summer storm

  • 1
  • 1
  • 28
Horizon, summer rain

D
Horizon, summer rain

  • 0
  • 0
  • 33
$12.66

A
$12.66

  • 6
  • 5
  • 176

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,814
Messages
2,781,234
Members
99,712
Latest member
asalazarphoto
Recent bookmarks
0

Wolfram Malukker

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 13, 2024
Messages
167
Location
Kentucky USA
Format
35mm
First time shooting 200T at night-some things look good, but mostly the highlights are just way too bright.

What do I need to work on to get these highlights under control?

KOwJlsV.jpg


gNqEPit.jpg


And the one that I am most disappointed with:

eX6SpqP.jpg


I should have been closer, I could crop this into a nice looking (to my eye) shot by cutting off some of the parking lot foreground, but in all the shots the lights are just too much. I am using the Lightmeter - Free app on my android phone right now.

What do I need to do with the light metering to get these highlights under control?
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,918
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
What do I need to do with the light metering to get these highlights under control?

Get closer and take readings from the areas that are illuminated more directly by the lights.
As far as the lights themselves are concerned, any time you photograph something that includes a light source, you need to make decisions about how you want the image to be rendered. In most cases, if you expose to get good details in the light source, the things illuminated by the light source are very much darker. Think of night-time city streets with neon signs - if the signs look nice, the streets are dark.
 
OP
OP

Wolfram Malukker

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 13, 2024
Messages
167
Location
Kentucky USA
Format
35mm
The Waffle House shot, I was hoping to get more light inside the building. I didn't realize the lighting around the top of the building was going to do what it did.

I have my shot notes so I'll go back again when it's cooler out and make another attempt-even though I didn't manage the light as well as I would like, I *really* like this 200T.

I might try some ham-handed bludgeoning in Lightroom tomorrow.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
22,837
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
What do I need to do with the light metering to get these highlights under control?

It's not really a metering issue, but mostly a scanning issue. The way these images were scanned has chopped off the higher part of the curve, leaving you with highlights that were blown out. They are not blown out on the actual negatives, I can assure you. It's nigh impossible to really blow out highlights on color negative!

Your metering of the scenes is certainly on the generous side, but overall this is preferable over the opposite, which would have left you with large, blank shadow areas. Contrary to the dense highlights, those shadows would be unrecoverable. With these particular negatives, getting the desired result is just a matter of re-scanning them so that the entire density range is scanned (nothing is being truncated) and then adjusting the curves until you're happy.

To illustrate, this is the Waffle House image with a curve adjustment as shown:
1721894072285.png

I suspect that the tonal values are more like you would have imagined them (of course I'm merely guessing at your intentions, so feel free to point it out if I got it all wrong!)

What I've done is two things:
1: suppress the green curve; the overall very green appearance is an artefact of Vision3 film run through processes (both developing and scanning) that are geared towards C41 color negative. This can mostly be corrected for as I've done here.
2: Suppress the high values very drastically to reduce overall contrast, especially in those high values.

This didn't yield a perfect outcome, and as indicated above, this is because of choices made in scanning the negative. These choices may have been made automatically by the scanning software. In this case it's a matter of choosing a different route to scan these; a route that offers more manual control.

The effects of the unfortunate scanning choices are visible in how the highlights render. Note in particular:
A: The coarse/'pixelated' rendition of the transitions in the upper highlights; e.g. in the "Waffle House" signage.
B: Color crossovers esp. in the green/magenta channel.
This is due to severe compression of the upper part of the curve that results in an inability to render tonal transitions smoothly. The problem is mostly apparent in the green channel because that's the "iffy one" when it comes to Vision3/ECN-2 film - and it's in my experience exacerbated if this film is run through C41 developer (but it's possible to mostly fix the issue in digital post processing - but much less so in optical enlargement).
A further problem is the limited bit depth I worked with here; if you have a 16-bit TIFF or PNG original scan to work with, you may get somewhat better results. But the actual scan will still be a limitation.

So all considered, this is mostly a problem with the digital part of the process. This is not to say that @MattKing is wrong in suggesting a different approach to metering - what he says about striking a compromise certainly is true. However, in this particular case and the metering choices that were made for these exposures, a better end result is still very well possible thanks to the latitude of the film used. Had you exposed these a stop or so less, the 'problem' of the highlights would also have been slightly reduced, although if the negatives were scanned in a similar way, the result would still have been compromised. So taking more control over the scanning step is critical in getting closer to where you want to get.
 
OP
OP

Wolfram Malukker

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 13, 2024
Messages
167
Location
Kentucky USA
Format
35mm
Yes, that is more what I was looking to find. I still think I could have metered better but a lot of Korak's assumptions are true. The film was developed in a C-41 process + added remjet removal step, and scanned with "Basic" processing. I'll get the negatives back when the mail runs.
I have my own scanner but it's a "2700DPI" HP S20, and the drivers and scanning software are barely functional on windows 10. I have not hunted up a Windows XP laptop to use with it yet.

I have had ECN-2 process film handled with Midwest Film Co and scanned to their "LOG" values, which was very muted, with a grey "haze" over the scanned image. This cleared up in Lightroom with a tutorial I found on youtube. Is this the kind of scan that Korak is talking about?

I think I'll find my solutions in changing a little bit of metering, a little bit of developing, and a little bit of the digital processing. Part of why I'm playing with the Vision3 films is the cost, but a lot of it is that I've read it was designed for digital intermediate processing, so I figure there will be a lot of support geared toward the digital side of working with that film. Ultimately until I have a house I can build a real darkroom in, I'll be limited in what I can do with the film after developing, and digital tools store a lot more easily when I don't have time to play with film!
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
22,837
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
OK, good, thanks for getting back to this - sounds like we're on the same page!
The main improvement will be in the scanning part, so I'd focus on that. I don't know how Midwest scan the film, but "muted" sounds good, actually. If you have a lab handle your scans, you ideally want them to come back looking rather flat, with somewhat grey (not quite black) shadows and grey (not quite white) highlights. You can then adjust them to taste.

Having a quick peek at the Midwest website, they mention "LOG files" as output, which I understand is aimed at the kind of color grading workflow you find in the cine industry. This sounds good - but as a still-image photographer, I'm not used to working with LOG. I'm sure there's ample of info out there on YouTube etc. on how to deal with logarithmic-encoded images.

Vision3 films is the cost, but a lot of it is that I've read it was designed for digital intermediate processing

Yeah, that's what it's mostly used for and what Kodak definitely had in mind when making the film. Fortunately, it actually prints quite nicely in the darkroom, when handled properly. For this purpose I develop it in ECN2 developer and overdevelop it a bit. Developing in C41 with normal C41 process parameters yields a similar gamma and is also printable, but with a little crossover in the highlights in my experience. This crossover is not apparent in ECN2 development, I find.
 
OP
OP

Wolfram Malukker

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 13, 2024
Messages
167
Location
Kentucky USA
Format
35mm
So what I got from Midwest is a .TIF file, around 70 megabytes in size for each photo. I'd edit and post one with a reasonable file size, but the photos were almost all underexposed due to the roll being a bracket test roll for the first half, and then me just trying to shoot it up and hope something turned out for the second bit.

I'm headed to Chicago next week so I'll take some photos while I'm there and get them together, and try to put into practice what I learn here.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom