He did say black and white (post #3), but indeed nothing about which film, nor about how it will be developed.
What negative Exposure compensation to use in country with bright light like India?
-
A
- Thread starter silvercloud2323
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Linhof Recessed lens board
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
For Sale Leica M4-2
- Started by chriscrawfordphoto
-
For Sale FS: Toyo Sliding Back for 4x5 Graflok
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
He did say black and white (post #3), but indeed nothing about which film, nor about how it will be developed.
Andrew O'Neill
Moderator
Only if you are taking the reading of the blacks (shadows) and nothing else.
To OP:
"The shadows" can also be a misleading expression, because it means the deep shadows without direct sunlight in sunny days, but it also means the darker tones in any photograph done in soft overcast light.
So, in general expose for the values your camera gives you, but metering things that aren't too dark or too light, and of course not including the sky or other sources of light in the parts of the scene you use for metering. All this for soft overcast light, or for subjects in the shadows in a sunny day.
Now, for subjects under direct sunlight, I recommend you to avoid metering, and just use 1/125 f/8 for ISO100 and 1/250 f/11 for ISO400. (Sunny f/16 is for slide film).
That will be good enough for wet printing and for scanning, and you'll be away from gross metering and exposure mistakes that appear easily.
"The shadows" can also be a misleading expression, because it means the deep shadows without direct sunlight in sunny days, but it also means the darker tones in any photograph done in soft overcast light.
So, in general expose for the values your camera gives you, but metering things that aren't too dark or too light, and of course not including the sky or other sources of light in the parts of the scene you use for metering. All this for soft overcast light, or for subjects in the shadows in a sunny day.
Now, for subjects under direct sunlight, I recommend you to avoid metering, and just use 1/125 f/8 for ISO100 and 1/250 f/11 for ISO400. (Sunny f/16 is for slide film).
That will be good enough for wet printing and for scanning, and you'll be away from gross metering and exposure mistakes that appear easily.
OP
OP
Fomapan 400, Kodak Tri X 400 , Kodak Tmax 400 are the films I want to use.
400, 400, and 400. Meter without the sky.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,932
- Format
- 8x10 Format
I'm glad I learned in an era when light meters were light meters. Doing without them in high contrast situations seems unthinkable. The two films which are going to handle that kind range best are the two speeds of TMax (100 and 400); but these are films which tend to require careful shadow metering.
Wait, whaaaaat? Worrying about too much light in India but using fast film? Might want to re-think that. Slower film might be a better option. Or use ND filters and compensate your exposure. But, honestly… this is getting much more complex than necessary.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,932
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Ordinary black and white contrast filters already add extra density. Who on earth uses ND's for black and white work? I don't use em for anything.
… only when the filters are used. Not everyone uses contrast filters.
Others seem to use both ND and polarizer with B&W. You might be unique.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 869
- Format
- 4x5 Format
Where do you live? Sunny 16 for me is 1/500 f/16~f22 for ISO 400. Do you develop your negatives normally. Heck that don't even matter, used to shoot slide and send to Kodak for Kodachrome (1/60th @ f16)
Totally agree. I'd go with half 100 or 125 and half 400, or at least 1/3 100 and 2/3 400. You'll need the 400 for early-morning, early-evening outings and for general situations in which a fast film is called for, but bright sun, open air, you'll appreciate what the slower film will give you - smaller grain, lower contrast (depending on the film, of course), etc.
And don't worry, no matter how much film you take, you'll end up needing more
. I learned that the hard way, and now I check up in advance where I can buy my films in the country/city I'm visiting.
Never read that before. In Canada - not exactly "The Mega-Sunshine Country", sunny 16 works well in the winter because of the sun reflecting all over the place on the snow (it's actually at times easier to go with sunny 16 then to meter...). I've also used it with success in the summer when stuck without a meter.
When snow (or sand or water) reflects direct sunlight, of course we close a stop more.
But exposing B&W for direct sunlight using the sunny f/16 rule, is a great recipe for shadows without enough detail. Those images don't convey an open sunny day atmosphere, but a dark sad terror scene one, but YMMV.
That rule is too conservative, and cares well about not burning highlights in color slide film.
I use TMax400 and Tri-X400 all day years and decades ago. My exposure for direct sunlight with rich shadows isn't 1/250 f/11, but half a stop more light: 1/250 f/8 1/2. Of course, with the prudent development time recommended by Kodak. A lot of people develop longer and that's why they can't expose for clean shadows. And that's why Kodak has recommended sunny f/16 exposure too: to protect their buyers' film even if it's overdeveloped... Empty shadows is a small problem compared to blocked highlights.
Everyone should feel free to keep doing things the way they do.
But exposing B&W for direct sunlight using the sunny f/16 rule, is a great recipe for shadows without enough detail. Those images don't convey an open sunny day atmosphere, but a dark sad terror scene one, but YMMV.
That rule is too conservative, and cares well about not burning highlights in color slide film.
I use TMax400 and Tri-X400 all day years and decades ago. My exposure for direct sunlight with rich shadows isn't 1/250 f/11, but half a stop more light: 1/250 f/8 1/2. Of course, with the prudent development time recommended by Kodak. A lot of people develop longer and that's why they can't expose for clean shadows. And that's why Kodak has recommended sunny f/16 exposure too: to protect their buyers' film even if it's overdeveloped... Empty shadows is a small problem compared to blocked highlights.
Everyone should feel free to keep doing things the way they do.
ISO400 is perfect for intense sun too: no problem.
ISO100 is better for wide apertures for portraiture. But ISO100 is useless even for portraiture when light is kind of low. You'll need tripod for ISO100 in many situations.
I use one or two rolls of ISO100 for every ten rolls of ISO400.
ISO100 is better for wide apertures for portraiture. But ISO100 is useless even for portraiture when light is kind of low. You'll need tripod for ISO100 in many situations.
I use one or two rolls of ISO100 for every ten rolls of ISO400.
Yes: as I said, a good rule for slide film both for highlights control and for saturation...
I had my last Kodachromes developed in 2009.
B&W film is a different technology. You expose differently depending on development.
You can decide to use the sunny f/16 rule, but that doesn't mean that's the best you can do for your B&W negatives.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,932
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Hi, Brian .... Contrast filters were probably purchased by B&W photographers at least a thousand to one over ND's and polarizers combined. ND popularity these days seems more a symptom of the digital camera rash or flea itch or whatever that is. Polarizers only work in relation to certain angles of the sun; and who the heck wants all the sparkle crushed out of a shot anyway? Mine stays in the lab near the copy stand if needed. I have no use for them outdoors. But then, I never trust any camera that takes charge of the exposures. I want to be in control of all that, especially if TMax is involved. Just developed a roll of 120 TMX100 a couple hours ago from a high contrast situation. FP4 is a lot more forgiving for a beginner. And guess good ole Triassic-X ain't bad if you don't mind grain bigger than buckshot.
Don't think many people see it as a rule. More like a basic guide when stuck without a reliable meter, in conditions you know. I'm used to the light in Montreal and know when I'm in a sunny 16 situation and when I need to modulate. When traveling, I take both incident and spot meter since, of course, I'd like to do the best I can do for my B&W negatives
.Of course it is. Again, there is no rule. It's a matter of preference, of what you're used to and comfortable with. I like taking out slower film because it give me something different and forces me to look differently. If OP decides to take only 400 film, it'll all be fine.
I don’t disagree, Drew. But this is getting out on a tangent. For the OP, who seems quite new to photography, it seems best success would be both slow and fast film… and putting the Canon A1 into an A mode and make some photos. I’ll bet that more than 95% will be generally acceptable to most people.
Personally, I’d take a bag of FP4+ and HP-5+ and see some sites. I detest being “confined” to fast speeds and small apertures, even for general photography. Or use appropriate contrast filters to tame the speed. And although I often shoot B&W “naked”, I’d suggested the OP get a yellow filter if one not already in possession.
Personally, I’d take a bag of FP4+ and HP-5+ and see some sites. I detest being “confined” to fast speeds and small apertures, even for general photography. Or use appropriate contrast filters to tame the speed. And although I often shoot B&W “naked”, I’d suggested the OP get a yellow filter if one not already in possession.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,932
- Format
- 8x10 Format
On those rare occasions I travel with just a Nikon and shoot handheld only, I shoot TMY400 exclusively, and simply leave a deep orange filter on it. But TTL metering systems don't always respond correctly with a strong filter in place. It really helps to have some serious practice prior to an important project. For portraits, I keep a light yellow-green filter in the kit. That pretty much covers it.
Fast film allows for larger f/stop numbers and therefore greater depths of field. What is wrong with that?
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...t-light-like-india.190268/page-2#post-2525657
Deep focus is over-rated.
Polarizing filters darken the sky and brings out the clouds better.
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...t-light-like-india.190268/page-2#post-2525657
Deep focus is over-rated.
Oh so you like the whole photograph to be out of focus. Good to know.
The OP is new to film photography and it would be better for him to have a large and forgiving depth of field.
Last edited:
Absolutely nothing wrong with that. If OP wants to carry only 400 film, there won't be any problem for him coming back home with great picks - which is the point.
But nothing wrong with adding a few 100 films and trying them out just in case he ends up liking the look. He's going to shoot so much film, it's not like they are going to be wasted.
Oh so you like the whole photograph to be out of focus. Good to know.
The OP is new to film photography and it would be better for him to have a large and forgiving depth of field.
| 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:  |