If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Tri-x 400 examples
I exposed at 400 speed
http://photobucket.com/albums/y13/Nygdan/Boston%20BnW/? This one seems like perhaps it could'vebeen sharper, to have more detail on what I think is a filled in doorway. http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-04A.jpg I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the usual no? Any criticisms of the photos would be appreciated from either group |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In rec.photo.equipment.35mm R.Schenck wrote:
I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg There is a large area on top of the doorway which is a uniform white, but this is not due to overexposure but is caused either by the way the negative has been printed or the way the picture has been scanned. It takes a huge amount of exposure before you lose highlight contrast, and even then you wouldn't wind up with zero contrast in the highlights. I can absolutely guarantee that the pure white parts of the image show detail on the negative. If I were printing this in the darkroom, I would burn-in the highlights using a piece of card with a hole in it. This would bring out the texture in the highlights. Are these pictures scanned from prints that someone else has made, or are they from a negative scanner? Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the usual no? Exposing at the rated speed of B&W negative film results in the shortest exposures for scenes of average contrast from which excellent prints can be made. Your pictures are mostly of average to moderately high contrast scenes, and I would be inclined to meter based on the shadow areas. If you are metering the average of the scene, then I would be inclined to derate the film by a stop. Many people shoot tri-X at 200 and get excellent results. Peter. -- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
In rec.photo.equipment.35mm R.Schenck wrote:
I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg There is a large area on top of the doorway which is a uniform white, but this is not due to overexposure but is caused either by the way the negative has been printed or the way the picture has been scanned. It takes a huge amount of exposure before you lose highlight contrast, and even then you wouldn't wind up with zero contrast in the highlights. I can absolutely guarantee that the pure white parts of the image show detail on the negative. If I were printing this in the darkroom, I would burn-in the highlights using a piece of card with a hole in it. This would bring out the texture in the highlights. Are these pictures scanned from prints that someone else has made, or are they from a negative scanner? Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the usual no? Exposing at the rated speed of B&W negative film results in the shortest exposures for scenes of average contrast from which excellent prints can be made. Your pictures are mostly of average to moderately high contrast scenes, and I would be inclined to meter based on the shadow areas. If you are metering the average of the scene, then I would be inclined to derate the film by a stop. Many people shoot tri-X at 200 and get excellent results. Peter. -- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
R.Schenck wrote:
I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg there appears to be a lot of missing texture at the top of the crypt, especially in the base of the statue which shows as a solid white block. I doubt you're overexposing, but rather overprinting or having scanning problems. are you scanning the negative directly or scanning from a print? Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the usual no? yes, depending on development. check the negative; if you don't see texture in the statue base, I'd examine your development process. -- Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | The United States is the one true country. The US is just. The US is fair. The US respects its citizens. The US loves you. We have always been at war against terrorism. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
R.Schenck wrote:
I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg there appears to be a lot of missing texture at the top of the crypt, especially in the base of the statue which shows as a solid white block. I doubt you're overexposing, but rather overprinting or having scanning problems. are you scanning the negative directly or scanning from a print? Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the usual no? yes, depending on development. check the negative; if you don't see texture in the statue base, I'd examine your development process. -- Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | The United States is the one true country. The US is just. The US is fair. The US respects its citizens. The US loves you. We have always been at war against terrorism. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"R.Schenck" wrote in message ... I exposed at 400 speed http://photobucket.com/albums/y13/Nygdan/Boston%20BnW/? This one seems like perhaps it could'vebeen sharper, to have more detail on what I think is a filled in doorway. http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-04A.jpg I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the usual no? Any criticisms of the photos would be appreciated from either group To me, they look like the paper grade is too high, or they've been overdeveloped a little. Labs usually go with a lot more contrast than I do, but that's the opinion of the wolds worst scanner. That would be me. I usually expose Tri-X @ 200, D76 1:1 is a very easy to use developer, although I like Rodinal when I can get it. It's necessary to find your own standard everything. Don't be afraid to bracket a few shots and bracket developement. The results will pay off in the future. I find that way too much contrast makes better scans, but I develop for prints, so there's the tradeoff. Bob Hickey |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"R.Schenck" wrote in message ... I exposed at 400 speed http://photobucket.com/albums/y13/Nygdan/Boston%20BnW/? This one seems like perhaps it could'vebeen sharper, to have more detail on what I think is a filled in doorway. http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-04A.jpg I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the usual no? Any criticisms of the photos would be appreciated from either group To me, they look like the paper grade is too high, or they've been overdeveloped a little. Labs usually go with a lot more contrast than I do, but that's the opinion of the wolds worst scanner. That would be me. I usually expose Tri-X @ 200, D76 1:1 is a very easy to use developer, although I like Rodinal when I can get it. It's necessary to find your own standard everything. Don't be afraid to bracket a few shots and bracket developement. The results will pay off in the future. I find that way too much contrast makes better scans, but I develop for prints, so there's the tradeoff. Bob Hickey |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I just wanted to respond to multiple posters at once. Thanks for all
the replies. I had the film developed at a 'pro' shop nearby, the images on-line are what came on the photo-cd that they also made, so I'd think that they are scanned from negatives. I have no darkroom nor ability to develop film and process prints on my own and usually go to a 'market' type developer with my color film. I've had problems getting them to develop anything 'pushed' in one direction or another so will probably go to a pro-shop to develope anything I do that with in the future. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
R.Schenck wrote: I exposed at 400 speed http://photobucket.com/albums/y13/Nygdan/Boston%20BnW/? This one seems like perhaps it could'vebeen sharper, to have more detail on what I think is a filled in doorway. http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-04A.jpg I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the usual no? Any criticisms of the photos would be appreciated from either group It is utterly pointless to try to do B&W work unless you process and print the film yourself. This is a complete waste of time! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
R.Schenck wrote:
I seriously resent you linking to a site with pop-ups. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tri-x 400 examples | R.Schenck | 35mm Photo Equipment | 14 | March 13th 05 11:01 PM |
8Mp Digital The Theoretical 35mm Quality Equivelant | Matt | Digital Photography | 1144 | December 17th 04 09:48 PM |
8Mp Digital The Theoretical 35mm Quality Equivelant | Matt | 35mm Photo Equipment | 932 | December 17th 04 09:48 PM |
Sigma SD9, 10 | Robert | Digital Photography | 166 | November 25th 04 03:01 AM |
New examples of photo paranoļa | Mxsmanic | Photographing People | 1 | February 8th 04 02:20 PM |