Help! Fomapan 100 overexposed at 400!

[darkkavenger]

first results .... picture 1 shows the scan right out of the scanner software, picture 2 is an enlargement, and picture 3 is after Adobe Lightroom processing.

This photo had a very high contrast when i took it, must've been like 1/250 f/16 or 1/500 f/16.

Contax IIIa & CV 21/4.


I'm scanning & scanning more

 

[darkkavenger]

see this:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28788&highlight=fomapan

and this:
shot in prague

They are nice, Martin!

 

[darkkavenger]

OK now for some serious things. ...

1st photo was taken with the Contax IIIa and a 50/1.5 Jupiter-3 from 1951 [KMZ] that I picked up at Foto Pazdera in Prague. Photo taken @ f/1.5
Those two women are part of the staff... the one in focus is very very nice


2nd photo, Contax IIIa and my 1970 J3 + Yellow G3 Zeiss-Ikon filter

I cropped here @900px but the resolution is quite nice

 

[darkkavenger]

Last photos and I'm off to bed ....

Contax IIIA and 1951 Jupiter-3
indeed fomapan 100 pushed at 400
12 minutes in Ilfotec LC29 1+19 @ 20°C

1st one is out of the scanner
2nd one after processing in adobe lightroom

anyway contrast & shadows seem to be quite hard. I didn't agitate too much. now it seems my mind is clouded & sleepy

 

[rich815]

The negative looks quite contrasty, I am trying to scan now. My scanner will ruin most of it as usual...

They look very useable. But it looks like just a tad less development time would have given you less to struggle against in terms of contrast in the scanning.

 

[darkkavenger]

It's good to know for next time! Well.. if I do the same mistake again! I'm generally an ISO 400 person. ISO 100 makes me do all kind of quirks, my camera hates it and will do me all sort of bad tricks to let me believe it's ISO 400 that i'm using.

Thanks for the help!

 

[FrankS]

Looks good Max. (I think I would have focused on the other woman. )

 

[rich815]

It's good to know for next time! Well.. if I do the same mistake again! I'm generally an ISO 400 person. ISO 100 makes me do all kind of quirks, my camera hates it and will do me all sort of bad tricks to let me believe it's ISO 400 that i'm using.

Thanks for the help!

I have an article I need to scan or reference online somewhere from Photo Techniques magazine that discusses what is lost by following the "add 50% to the time for each stop push" myth (myth being their word not mine). They simply show that little is lost but all gained by being less aggressive in the adding of development time for pushing. They also mention that they found that a 100 speed B&W film pushed to 400 but only subtley pushed in the increasing of development time by 30% or so gives practically as good contrast as 400 speed films but with less grain! I'll dig it up and at least paraphrase the pertinent parts this weekend if I have time. Interesting stuff.

 

[FrankS]

I don't know about myth, but I do know that it really sucks to try to get good prints from B+W negs that are 2 stops under exposed!

 

[darkkavenger]

Looks good Max. (I think I would have focused on the other woman. )

She was moving too much ... the best focus would've been to take a photo of the young and gorgeous lady who usually sells me the gear... I'll do that on monday

I'll pick up a crazy lens in Pentacon Six mount. More monday

 

[martin-f5]

first results .... picture 1 shows the scan right out of the scanner software, picture 2 is an enlargement, and picture 3 is after Adobe Lightroom processing.

This photo had a very high contrast when i took it, must've been like 1/250 f/16 or 1/500 f/16.

Contax IIIa & CV 21/4.


I'm scanning & scanning more

Is this the Dvo?ák museum in Praha?

 

[darkkavenger]

Nope, it's the Kovarovic villa : see here
http://www.prague-pictures.cz/photos/61/prague-cubist-architecture-kovarovic-villa