Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   Keyphoto   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   RK Photo   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies   Silverprint Ltd

Notices

Go Back   Film and Darkroom User > General discussions > Photography in general

  ***   Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks   ***

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 4th April 2016, 05:21 PM
photowaffle
guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default What's this?

Hi.

On a C200 film i got done recently, there was this photo with this foggy effect. Can you tell me what caused this?



Thanks
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 4th April 2016, 05:26 PM
John King John King is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: County Durham
Posts: 2,252
Default

To me it looks like under-exposure. The grain visible in the sky is a characteristic. The muddy colours are another.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 4th April 2016, 05:28 PM
photowaffle
guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John King View Post
To me it looks like under-exposure. The grain visible in the sky is a characteristic. The muddy colours are another.
Now you mention it, I did have the ISO 200 above what the film reccomended.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 4th April 2016, 07:44 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 7,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by photowaffle View Post
Now you mention it, I did have the ISO 200 above what the film reccomended.
Colour neg film can stand quite a bit of overexposure but only a little bit of underexposure. Just as a matter of interest what was it underexposed by i.e. what did you set the film speed at?

I am curious as I have seen examples of Kodak Porta underexposed by 1 stop with almost no noticeable difference but that seems to be the limit. It is always useful to know what C200 can accomodate as underexposure

Thanks

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 5th April 2016, 06:49 AM
photowaffle
guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O'Pray View Post
what did you set the film speed at?
ISO 400. I had just been shooting Ilford HP5+ 400. The film speed should have been 200 ISO.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 5th April 2016, 09:58 AM
John King John King is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: County Durham
Posts: 2,252
Default

I think like Mike that under exposure is the death knell. This may have not been helped with a possible misreading of the exposure by the camera which obviously made the situation worse that it would have otherwise been. There is a fairly large expanse of bright sky which would have altered the meter reading. Was this the only frame that was affected.

There was an old saying with B&W photographers that is still true today when using film. 'Expose for the shadows and the highlights will take care of them selves'
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 5th April 2016, 07:02 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 7,706
Default

Thanks Tom. I suppose I should have asked if this was a good scan of a print. Was it?

Apart from the nearside hedge very little shadow detail has been lost but somehow it has a slighly foggy look. You can tell it's a sunny day but the vibrancy of colour has been lost

It may be that a cheaper film such as C200 which may or may not be the same as Fuji Superia 200 gives this look at even 1 stop under whereas the better quality and of course more expensive Kodak Portra and Fuji 400H show little change at one stop under.

John makes some good points about sky and metering so in effect the actual exposure speed may have rendered the under-exposure to more than one stop.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 8th April 2016, 06:38 AM
photowaffle
guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O'Pray View Post
Thanks Tom. I suppose I should have asked if this was a good scan of a print. Was it?
You'll have to ask ASDA photo center. My community darkroom is only set up for black and white.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 8th April 2016, 07:21 AM
photowaffle
guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The scanner is fairly good, but some of the other underexposed photos were fine!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 8th April 2016, 08:04 AM
JOReynolds JOReynolds is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: St Albans UK/Agde France
Posts: 902
Default

I used to set up printers and analysers in labs. From time to time I also had to deal with complaints and I became familiar with technical failures.
Photowaffle's print showed severe underexposure - perhaps two or more stops? At that amount of underexposure I don't think the brand or type of film, or the scanner, would have much to do with the result.
As Mike O'Pray said 'Colour neg film can stand quite a bit of overexposure but only a little bit of underexposure.'
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
c200, colour, film is not dead
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   Keyphoto   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   RK Photo   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies   Silverprint Ltd

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.