/p/ - Photography » Thread #3256736

[9 / 2 / ?]

223KiB, 1361x625, temp.jpg

Anonymous Sun 11 Mar 2018 23:32:34 No.3256736 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3256752 >>3256753 >>3256756

Is the whole
>film should be rated at a slower ISO than box speed meme
actually true or is it just old cameras had shit light meters (like current fuji digital cameras that underexpose everything) and because film is better overexposed than underexposed people would just put a slower film speed in to make sure they didn't underexpose?

giannis

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Portra8.jpg, 210KiB, 1200x1200

giannis Sun 11 Mar 2018 23:52:02 No.3256752 Report

Quoted By:

>>3256736
>because film is better overexposed than underexposed people would just put a slower film speed in to make sure they didn't underexpose?
Essentially this. It is a safety net for (most) negative film. Also many people like the look of overexposed Portra or Fuji Pro400H.

Lastly, in very contrasty light, when you try to contract a very wide dynamic range to fit into the film's DR, you *have* to "overexpose" film (meter in the deep shadows), and compensate in development to save the highlights (either by reducing dev time or by using a compensating developer).

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Mar 2018 23:52:59 No.3256753 Report

Quoted By:

>>3256736
modern film has way more latitude for overexposure than underexposure

https://petapixel.com/2016/03/29/exposure-affects-film-photos/

http://canadianfilmlab.com/2014/04/24/film-stock-and-exposure-comparisons-kodak-portra-and-fuji/

that said, shooting it at box speed will give (obviously) correct exposure and most correct colors

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 12 Mar 2018 00:17:52 No.3256756 Report

Quoted By: >>3256765

>>3256736
the only negative that looks ok overexposed is fuji pro (the japs regularly do it to create this super washed out girly look)
overexposed portra/ektar have ugly yellow/cyan tints
don't fall for the meme

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 12 Mar 2018 00:33:07 No.3256765 Report

Quoted By: >>3256768 >>3256770

>>3256756
How accurate are the light meters in SLRs though?

giannis

giannis Mon 12 Mar 2018 00:40:54 No.3256768 Report

Quoted By: >>3256772

>>3256765
Extremely accurate is they're CdS or silicon cells, i.e. what every camera from the '70's or later has.

But you need to know how the meter works to get the exposure you want. Is it an averaging meter? Centre weighted? Spot? One of the newer "matrix" ones?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 12 Mar 2018 00:46:51 No.3256770 Report

Quoted By: >>3256772

>>3256765
It's difficult to tell and not necessarily meaningful to say "well sometimes they're a bit over/under" because it's more about how they meter the scene. I don't think meters, especially older, simpler ones have the capacity to go out of calibration. Absolute accuracy in exposure is also less important than it seems, especially if you're on digital, or a analog with digital scanning.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 12 Mar 2018 00:49:36 No.3256772 Report

Quoted By: >>3256776

>>3256768
>>3256770
I have TTL, center-weighted on my film camera.

giannis

giannis Mon 12 Mar 2018 00:53:21 No.3256776 Report

Quoted By:

>>3256772
Ok, a good way to meter (negative film) with centre weighted meters, is to point the split prism in the viewfinder in a darkish area of your frame, half press shutter to lock exposure, re-compose and shoot.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches