Show us yer film shots then!

Great portraits Paul. I think the top two (colour) ones need a bit of warmth, but otherwise I like them. That last one though, absolutely spot on! Please tell me that one wasn't shot on Astia :p
 
Great set Nick, very impressed. Sorry for asking such a simple question but when you say Ilford 400 set to 200 does that mean that on the camera you tell it the ASA is 200 and would that then under-expose the images and if so by how many stops?

Andy
 
Andysnap said:
Great set Nick, very impressed. Sorry for asking such a simple question but when you say Ilford 400 set to 200 does that mean that on the camera you tell it the ASA is 200 and would that then under-expose the images and if so by how many stops?

Andy
Click to expand...

This is the basis of pull-processing. You set the camera to meter as 200 iso, which results in a 1 stop overexposure on 400 iso film. Then, to get back to normal you under-develop the film by 1 stop, resulting in a properly exposed negative, but with less grain because the film has spent less time in the developer.

each doubling of the ISO = 1 stop,

50 - 100, 1 stop
50 - 200, 2 stop
50 - 400, 3 stop
etc

It's usually recomended that you only pull process by 1 stop (as above) whereas you can push process 2-3 stops (or more if you like grain like hailstones!)
 
Thanks BY, clear as crystal now. So if you were sending to a developers you would ask them to pull process the developing (and pay extra I suspect)?

Andy
 
Thank God TBY is here cause I is far to drunk to explain all that :lol::lol::lol:

Thanks Liam :thumbs:

Thanks Andy :D
 
Last edited:
paulhuk said:
Studio shots on my Mamiya RZ67 Pro II.

Katy







Emma







The colour ones are either on Fuji Astia 100F or time expired Fujicolor 400NPH. I'm still struggling with getting the colour right on my scans.

The B&Ws are on Ilford Pan Plus50.


Paul
Click to expand...

Thats a gorgeous set of portraits and the colour ones especilly benefit from the film colours
 
Andysnap said:
Great set Nick, very impressed. Sorry for asking such a simple question but when you say Ilford 400 set to 200 does that mean that on the camera you tell it the ASA is 200 and would that then under-expose the images and if so by how many stops?

Andy
Click to expand...

TheBigYin said:
This is the basis of pull-processing. You set the camera to meter as 200 iso, which results in a 1 stop overexposure on 400 iso film. Then, to get back to normal you under-develop the film by 1 stop, resulting in a properly exposed negative, but with less grain because the film has spent less time in the developer.

each doubling of the ISO = 1 stop,

50 - 100, 1 stop
50 - 200, 2 stop
50 - 400, 3 stop
etc

It's usually recomended that you only pull process by 1 stop (as above) whereas you can push process 2-3 stops (or more if you like grain like hailstones!)
Click to expand...

Just to expand on this a little for the benefits of those that don't know about it.

As well as allowing you to shoot a film at a more convenient ISO, for example 400 might be too fast in the lighting conditions and you don't have and 200 with you there is another benefit.

By shooting a film at a slower speed you are over exposing the film. The film's sensitivity hasn't changed so by down rating the ISO you're giving it more exposure. The good thing about this is that it gives you more shadow detail, the longer you expose the film to those dark areas the more detail you get. The side effect is that your also over exposing the highlights.

Developing has a bigger effect on the highlights than it does the shadows (in general, of course there are methods, developers etc etc but I'm keeping this basic). So by developing a 400 film at 200 you are under-developing it and thus protecting the highlights. Essentially what you've done here is extend the dynamic range of your film.

There are trade offs, compromises and all sorts of other things going on, film is a wonderfully complex world with as many methods of processing as digital.

I'd recommend "Creative Black & White Photography" by Les McLean if you want an easy to understand explanation of the zone system and the reasons for pushing and pulling film. I picked it up in one of those bargain book shops for £2 and it was so much easier to understand than the book I had by Roger Hicks (the fella who writes the column in the back of AP)
 
medwaygreen said:
#2
Photo11_10Ae7.jpg
Click to expand...
Very nice:thumbs:
 
Thanks, Javier
 
Thanks for that Kev. Seems that there is an awful lot more to learn yet then.

Is the book by the Les McLean who contributes to TP?

Andy
 
No I don't think it's the same guy. It is the same Les McLean that's on the FADU forum though.
 
Ok. Just had a look on bay-e and its available new for £7.75 BIN so I think I'll get it later.

Andy
 
Following on from what Kev has said, also I find that under exposing and developing accordingly (Ilford is great for that as there data sheets give you different times depending on what you set your ISO to) I find that give a mush larger tonal range.

Meaning that when i scan I can do far more with level and curves to get the effect I want. All the above, shot on a very bright day, have had small amounts of curve added to get nice blacks and good highlights.

I believe that darkroom printing is also easier as well, but I as I have not tried it I am not 100% on this.

Before I started to do things this way I used to have to play for ages in PS to get the tonal range I was after.
 
jgredline said:
Love this shot!. Shame about the pimple though. Perhaps cloning it out?
Click to expand...

Cloning?....Film?.....Begone Satan :D

These are some studio shots on 35mm B&W Fomapan 100 of Laura.

I thought I'd taken them on either a Pentax SP500 or Fujica ST605 but the focusing seems way too consistent - you won't be seeing any of the blurry colour shots I took with them :( - so I think it must have been an EOS500.














Paul
 
#5... Excellent. Love it.


PS - should say why when technically it's a bit... For me it's a much more personal shot than the rest, seems to be a pic for the tog not the folio. Nice.
 
Last edited:
Nice set there Paul

~note to self get your gear sorted and try some portraits before the year ends~
 
paulhuk said:
Cloning?....Film?.....Begone Satan :D

These are some studio shots on 35mm B&W Fomapan 100 of Laura.

I thought I'd taken them on either a Pentax SP500 or Fujica ST605 but the focusing seems way too consistent - you won't be seeing any of the blurry colour shots I took with them :( - so I think it must have been an EOS500.










Paul
Click to expand...

Nice set Paul and believe me. I hated using the dreaded word clone on film. Heck, I normally don't like to clone in or out in digital. :cool:
 
That last one Javier is sureal
 
#1
Photo21_20cs5.jpg

#2
Photo20_19cs5.jpg

#3
Photo17_16cs5.jpg

#4
Photo06_5cs5.jpg
 
Very nice set Richard. Amazing that film lasts as long as it does isn't it.

Andy
 
Some photos from Croatia:

Olympus OM-2n
Zuiko 50mm 1.8 (+ filthy UV filter :lol:)
Reala 100 / NC 160 / VC 160 / Impresa 50 / Velvia 50

HolidaySmall-04.jpg


HolidaySmall-07.jpg


HolidaySmall-08.jpg


HolidaySmall-10.jpg


HolidaySmall-15.jpg


HolidaySmall-14.jpg
 
Thanks Javier:thumbs:
 
Javier, Your photo titled Hanging out is just brilliant, the old gentleman on the bench with that advertisement behind just makes for a great photograph. Wonderful.
 
^^^WHS^^^ Cracking shot :thumbs:
 
Photo23_22.jpg


Photo25_24.jpg


New light seals on the EM
 
Last edited:
I had a couple of lenses to test out yesterday - the FD135 and FD35-105, so went for a little wander.

Angler at Rest


End of the Raspberry Crop


You're not Coming in here Wearing Those...


All shot on the Canon A-1, Ilford FP4+, Ilfosol 1+14 and scanned on Canoscan 8800F with Silverfast SE software.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top