Do you really believe in exposing at iso 320?

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Also, you're completely ignoring tonality. The best looking 35mm FP4+ negs I've ever seen were developed in PMK. I don't know what the ISO speed of FP4 may be in PMK, but nor do I care very much. I'd probably rate the film at around EI 80 to begin with: +1/3 stop over box speed because I (from all I've ever heard) suspect that PMK doesn't give box speed, then +1/3 stop because I generally prefer tonality with +1/3 stop over the ISO speed.

Cheers,

R.

Roger, I agree on FP4 and PMK. It is a magnificent combination. I shoot FP4 at EI-80 for PMK developing.

 

[charjohncarter]

This one is pretty cool exactly BECAUSE it's underexposed. I would correct the perspective here though, but it's just me...

I pay no attention to 1/3 steps, etc., and try to overexpose most of a time.
You have to work hard to actually blow the highlights on film so I am not worried about it...

Actually that hall tree looks like that it isn't straight up and down. One reason I use 200-250 is because where I shoot most is in full sun. The extra exposure fills the shadows with light giving you that feeling of being in LA near the beach. I learned this trick from Henry Wessel:

http://www.americansuburbx.com/2011/02/asx-tv-henry-wessel-vintage-photographs-2011.html

He discusses this method in the first 2 minutes of the video.

 

[MIkhail]

Actually that hall tree looks like that it isn't straight up and down. One reason I use 200-250 is because where I shoot most is in full sun. The extra exposure fills the shadows with light giving you that feeling of being in LA near the beach. I learned this trick from Henry Wessel:

http://www.americansuburbx.com/2011/02/asx-tv-henry-wessel-vintage-photographs-2011.html

He discusses this method in the first 2 minutes of the video.

I should have said "overexposed", not "under"... brain fart...
I agree with your rationale and like the results myself too..

 

[Ronald M]

1/3 stopover all kinds of possible errors, shutter speeds, f stops, meter errors, and developer.

Film speed is determined under lab conditions with a standard developer which is D76 if I remember correctly. Others may give a a different speed.

A bit of temp variation or agitation or small timing errors have little effect on shadow detail and film speed is based on shadow detail. Other errors will have an effect on contrast overall.

I like the result of 1/2 box speed and cutting time 20 %. Lots of shadow detail , and easy to print. Great looking prints with fine grain, finer than a fine grain developer will give and at least equal to lower speed films.

320 is fine if you get good prints you like. This is art and you do what pleases you as long as you do not go too far of the reservation without lots of experience.

 

[Colin Corneau]

I defy anyone here to tell if a strip of negatives was shot at EI 320 or 400.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I defy anyone here to tell if a strip of negatives was shot at EI 320 or 400.

I can't tell what speed someone set their camera or meter to, but I can sure tell if a neg is slightly underexposed, which is what you get if you expose a film whose true speed is 320 at 400.

The real speed of a film depends on the developer you use. Some developers will give the 'box speed,' some will give a lower speed and some will increase speed.

 

[teddy]

another example : my metering technique is very special ( and may be considered very bad , but who cares, everybody does what he wants ) , i usually do an exposure metering of the ground of the place i'm in ( weird, isn't it ?! )

I meter a scene just like you.
I expose, say Tri-X at 320, and I tend to get more open even highlights.
But I prefer to expose at 200 ISO.

 

[Sid836]

It is hard to be subjective on this. Personally, I test the film and eventually rate it at what EI gives me the look I like most. However many friends of mine do not share this. What I like is not what they like too.
I have to admit though that 1/3 of a stop does not always make a notable, but there are many cases where it does, as previously noted when one needs just a hint of detail in the shadows. There a 1/3 of a stop makes the difference between good and bad.

 

[mcfingon]

I meter a scene just like you.
I expose, say Tri-X at 320, and I tend to get more open even highlights.

I fondly remember using 120-size TXP320 in the 1980's and still set that ISO speed on my digital camera as a favourite purely for sentimental reasons. And I'm another one who likes plenty of shadow detail when I'm shooting black and white film. My current Leica M6 seems to do this automatically when I use the built-in light meter readings, so I do!

 

[x-ray]

I defy anyone here to tell if a strip of negatives was shot at EI 320 or 400.

It's impossible to tell what ISO a film is exposed at but very easy to an experienced eye to tell if the exposure on the neg is correct. Also to an experienced eye it's easy to see a third of a stop.

I expose my film at Effective ISO that gives me the shadow detail I'm looking for and that translates to paper using my enlarger and technique.

 

[Ronald M]

Did not vote because what is important is know corrections for every shutter speed, thermometer, type of water, enlarger type, enlarger lens contrast, and meter accuracy.

Come up with a proper developing time so you can print a full tone image with proper blacks & whites. No burn or dodge allowed. #2 paper works for me.

Turns out manufactures time data and diffusion enlarger + leica lens works out fine. I do have a shutter checker and two Kodak process thermometers I use to calibrate/check my working dial thermometers. I mix my own D76 and vital components are done on a digital scale. Metol is fresh and stored in small containers. I do not keep half full bottles of developer. Even 3-5 days causes issues. Except for Rodinal
when I kept a bottle for testing and it worked the same for 10 years, 1996 to 2006 when it just started to go. 8 hours for diluted print developer even if one print went thru it.
30 minutes for diluted film developer used or not. Which is why mine is in 4 oz sealed glass bottles. I do not do stand developer ever. Follow instructions. If there was a better way Kodak or Ilford would tell you. Trust me they want you to get the most from their film.

 

[Steve M.]

I use 250 for Tri-X. Some people use 200. It doesn't matter, it's Tri-X!!! No one will ever, ever know. I once shot a roll making 3 exposures for each image at 100, 200, and 400 (50, 100, and 200 w/ a yellow filter) just to see what happened. Processing in D76 full strength was the same for all three settings. They all looked great! Shadows were a tad blocked up at 50, but the image quality looked really good at all of the speeds.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I love the old threads, so much information in there that gets a fresh audience. A great read.

And you never know what freshie will pick from old thread like this. .

 

[fs999]

Exact exposure is very important for reversal film, that's why I said yes.

 

[Ste_S]

I give consumer C41 an extra third of a stop of light just because they can take overexposure more than underexposure.
Normally you're not going to notice a difference, but hopefully it'll give me a touch more room to get shadow detail in high contrast scenes and avoid the dreaded muddy shadows that you can get in under exposed consumer C41.