BW400CN in Arizona Sun + Vario-Sonnar Zoom = blown highlights

[akptc]

I took the shots sampled below a few days ago, in early afternoon, in Arizona, using G2's AE. The light was almost summer-like bright and all I had loaded was the Kodak BW400CN. A bit to my surprise, nearly all frames had blown highlights, here are two examples:

My question is, was the reason for this:
a) wrong film for the light conditions
b) a combination of a high-contrast film (?) and a high-contrast Zeiss lens
c) lack of skills (I am erring on answer "c" right now) but what should I have done differently?
d) other (please elaborate)

Generally speaking, I've been spoiled by the G2 kit, and typically expect pretty good, usable exposure, even in bright light, e.g. like in this duck picture, also taken in Arizona on a sunny day:

I'd appreciate any feedback.

 

[RF-Addict]

I think it is a combination of things - starting with some of the harshest light you will find - especially early afternoon. On top of that you have a very conntrasty lens and the film tends to be more contrasty as well - not sure that there was anything you could have done to avoid those blown out highlights, other than using a traditional B&W film and altering your development times to keep the highlights in check.

 

[Ronald M]

Side lighted by harsh light and you exposed for the shadows. What did you expect. Read the light.

 

[akptc]

How they were scanned

How they were scanned

Thanks a bunch for your feedback. The two example pics in the 1st post were scanned by me on old Minolta Elite II film scanner. I then cropped them a bit and used USM on PS.

Here are the scans of both frames by Walgrees where the film was developed:

 

[akptc]

...I will repeat it is very hard to overexpose c-41 film enough to blow the highlights.

Patrick

That's what I thought too, and it never happened to me to that degree before. So the main mistake I made here was not exposing for the highlights, correct?

 

[RF-Addict]

Actually with C-41 the old saying is true - expose for the shadows - the part that is missing is "develop for the highlights" - you can do that with B&W film, but only to a limited extend with C-41. I think in your situation there was just too much contrast in the scene and you have to pick what you want to expose correctly - it probably would have been better to let the shadows go completely black and expose for the highlights. This is a good learning experience - i bet you next time you encounter such a contrasty scene you'll remember. Even with C-41 there are limits as to how much the film can handle - this is a good example.

 

[akptc]

...This is a good learning experience - i bet you next time you encounter such a contrasty scene you'll remember. ...

I sure will, I mean, I take crappy pics all the time but usually I know what to expect 🙂. Interestingly, when using a Hexar AF with the same film in similar light conditions, there seems to be less of a problem with the highlights, my guess is because the lens is less contrasty? The lighting in central Arizona where I live has generally been a challenge for me in summertime (and it's almost always summer around here 🙂), unless I use v. slow film; low ISO color slides tend to come out pretty well.

 

[rogue_designer]

It's possible that a careful scan with a high dmax negative scanner will be able to retreive data in those highlights. It's nearly impossible to totally block up the Kodak BW400CN in my experience.

Besides, in the samples you posted, the bright white highlights do not seem to me to be particularly bothersome. Conveys the quality of light and moment very well. It was a sunny day. The pictures look like they were taken on a sunny day. Not a failure IMO.

 

[Doug]

It's possible that a careful scan with a high dmax negative scanner will be able to retreive data in those highlights. It's nearly impossible to totally block up the Kodak BW400CN in my experience.

Agreed... You might examine those negs with a strong loupe or projected by an enlarger on the easel and see what detail you see in those highlight areas. Perhaps a second scan geared more to the highlight detail could be merged with the original scan to give it a richer look.

 

[Socke]

I'm sure that the highlights can be saved by decent scanning.