God originally created light in exactly eight zones of gray. But then Super-XX film came along and somebody thought they detected twelve zones. But then Ansel Adam's discovered that if you simply developed Super-XX for less time, you got back to eight zones, which made Minor White happy because he had already founded a religion which only allows eight zones to be contemplated while sitting crosslegged on a bamboo floormat. Kodak taught a different religion entirely, based on a curved universe.
Although I always shoot at box speed, I may expose at variation to this.
I have always used the box speed. Some cut the ISO by 1/3, 1/2. or 2/3 f/stop to get a denser negative or because they think that they will get more shadow detail. I suspect that many do it because:
- They do not know how to meter correctly and regularly take light readings of the sky.
- Their light meters, cameras or lenses need a CLA.
- They think they are smarter than the film manufacturer.
- They love to test and would rather test than actually take photographs.
- Some are Zonistas.
- They are compensating for not knowing what they are doing. Related to #1 though #4.
Lowering the speed of Velvia 50 to 40 will increase the contrast.
It will make your slides look brighter with the projector on "Low" which might, in the long run, be better for the slides.
Lowering the speed of Velvia 50 to 40 will increase the contrast.
Lowering the speed of Velvia 50 to 40 will increase the color saturation.
I agree! Sirius' list is a hoot.
We could ad to it ad infinitum - invite 'em - the Illuminati to add more light to 'em.
exposing slide film by 1/4 to 1/2 f/stop will increase saturation. The danger is that, at least back then if one under exposed by 1 f/stop the slide would start getting too dark.
The only "real" reason to test for EI is to find out... Now does this make me one of the illuminati(whatever that is)?............Regards!
I do wish to ask if PE is still reading this thread - I looked up that reference you posted. I have an old Weston meter that is in ASA, recently calibrated, and maybe one or two Pentax bodies that say ASA. So, my read is that I need to derate by one stop the ASA setting relative to the film ISO to compensate for the meter readings of these devices?
I do wish to ask if PE is still reading this thread - I looked up that reference you posted. I have an old Weston meter that is in ASA, recently calibrated, and maybe one or two Pentax bodies that say ASA. So, my read is that I need to derate by one stop the ASA setting relative to the film ISO to compensate for the meter readings of these devices?
I do wish to ask if PE is still reading this thread - I looked up that reference you posted. I have an old Weston meter that is in ASA, recently calibrated, and maybe one or two Pentax bodies that say ASA. So, my read is that I need to derate by one stop the ASA setting relative to the film ISO to compensate for the meter readings of these devices?
EI and ASA are so close that there is very little difference.
No. They will work properly when set it ASA is set to the ISO speed. ASA was renamed ISO for all practical [and impractical] purposes.
Is that a typo for "ISO and ASA are so close there is very little difference." ?
No. They will work properly when set it ASA is set to the ISO speed. ASA was renamed ISO for all practical [and impractical] purposes.
The AMERICAN STANDARD ORIGANZATION was changed to the INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ORIGANZATION
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?