Over exposing C41 Colour Negative Film

[Stealth3kpl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I may have posted this before, but it's worth posting again to encourage more to ditch the digital and dig out those film Ms :

 

Kodak Portra and Fuji 400H comparisons and exposure tests | UK Film Lab

 

Pete

[Doc Henry]

Very interesting and useful. Thanks Pete

It looks fine Fuji Fuji* is cheaper

Regards

Henry

* post 1985 and 1986

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/286747-i-like-film-open-thread-100.html

[Keith (M)]

An interesting and thought-provoking article - thanks. I do wonder though what the outcome of using the +2 stops recommendation would be in higher contrast situations than in the soft light used in their tests?

[Stealth3kpl]

I think they do mention increased magenta shift in highliights, and the risk of losing detail in highlights. I spent a day in bright sunlight shooting at +2, and it wasn't too bad.

Pete

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[Stealth3kpl]

Darkening in photoshop shows some usable detail.

Pete

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Keith (M)]

Pete, the relevant bit is:-

At higher exposures (generally +3 and +4) the magenta tone in the highlights increased across the film stocks and required more correction. With this type of light and backdrop this hasn’t posed much of a problem, but in a different scene the need to remove excess magenta could cause unwanted colour shifts that adversely affect the result of your image. And in full direct sun for example, you would definitely risk losing detail at the top end of the exposure range. In this type of lighting our general recommendation would be for 2 stops of overexposure for optimum results.

.

This implies that +2 is fine for higher contrast conditions. Maybe worth a try next time I load a roll of Portra.

[Doc Henry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Pete, the relevant bit is:-

.

This implies that +2 is fine for higher contrast conditions. Maybe worth a try next time I load a roll of Portra.

"a roll of Portra" yes Keith you're right

Best

Henry

[Doc Henry]

I think they do mention increased magenta shift in highliights, and the risk of losing detail in highlights. I spent a day in bright sunlight shooting at +2, and it wasn't too bad.

Pete

[ATTACH]468244[/ATTACH]

Lovely portrait , Pete nice color

Best

Henry

[robert blu]

Interesting comparisons, I usually shoot fuji 400 H rated at 200 and exposed for the shadows which at the end means something between +2 and +3.

Normal development and adjustment after scanning in LR or PS.

It works reasonably well for me.

robert

 

PS: A couple of pics unfortunately not shot with Leica here.

PS n°2:it's a dark and wet weekend here and I was thinking to try a portra 800 in my m7. I'll give a try exposing at 400...

[robert blu]

More pics from Fuji Pro 400h rated @200 iso and exposed for the shadows in this post.

Scanned with Nikon 5000ED and Vuescan.

[A miller]

Darkening in photoshop shows some usable detail.

Pete

 

[ATTACH]468246[/ATTACH]

 

Pete - I am not sold on the analysis of the lab that posted the article. The image they used for their experiment involved a fairly low contrast scene, which had a fairly normal exposure value range.

 

The lovely images that you shared appear to have been shot right around midday, with the bright sun reflect straight down on the subject. The scene has a fairly wide exposure value range, which create very unbecoming shadows on the face. I don't think that any amount of overexposing can satisfactorily manage this. The only real way is to use fill flash or a reflector.

 

When dealing with a scene with subjects that have a range of different exposure values, whether or not, and the extent to which, one should over-expose really depends on whether one is taking some sort of average exposure value (along the lines of the zone system), or are exposing for a particular subject in the scene.

 

When using the zone system, there is already an over-exposing element with respect to the subjects that have the highest exposure values. It is built into the system of calculating the right exposure to use.

 

In a fast-paced street shooting environment (in which I do most of my shooting), the zone system is impractical, and I typically find that the most important subject in a scene to expose correctly are faces. Most faces are typically lighter than middle gray, so an incident meter reading will, by definition over-expose the faces. I typically will take the incident meter reading and then open up another half of a stop. I find that this provides a good balance between capturing maximum information and tonal value in the faces, capturing very usable info in surrounding subjects (clothing, walls, cars, etc), yet not trying to make miracles of shadow areas. After all, this is the way we see it in real life.

 

Here are a few examples of what I mean (using portra 400, pushed one stop).

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Best,

Adam

[Brenton C]

Just when I thought I had a conceptual hold on metering, I read something coming from a different direction, and blam, my head hurts.

 

Can you confirm, did you mean you stop down, rather than open up a half stop to correct for over exposed pasty white faces when metering ambiently?

[Stealth3kpl]

I think he means open up half a stop for a little more detail in the shadows. When scanned correctly, there won't be information loss in the highlights, and a little more information in the dark areas.

The problem with these sort of high contrast scenes is that the lab typically scans on auto exposure. If the scene is mainly dark but you expose for the sunlit face, the scanner will over expose the image and bleach out the face. You need a lab which considers each image individually.

Pete

[Stealth3kpl]

Pete - I am not sold on the analysis of the lab that posted the article. The image they used for their experiment involved a fairly low contrast scene, which had a fairly normal exposure value range.

 

 

Best,

Adam

 

They do allude to this in the write-up

"With this type of light and backdrop this hasn’t posed much of a problem, but in a different scene the need to remove excess magenta could cause unwanted colour shifts that adversely affect the result of your image. And in full direct sun for example, you would definitely risk losing detail at the top end of the exposure range."

 

The images I've posted we're from an experimental film, greatly overexposing it to see what would turn out. I was dubious that things would turn out with such overexposure, but it was much better than I expected. I've some images of landscapes taken with a Nikon on another computer in which even the clouds and sky aren't blown out. Amazing stuff, film!

Pete

[Stealth3kpl]

 

 

 

 

[ATTACH]470559[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Best,

Adam

 

Love this.

Pete

[A miller]

Brenton - I meant overexpose another half stop to capture details in subject that are darker than middle gray. The idea is that the film has enough latitude to handle the overexposure of the white faces b/n one and two stops. If I am trying to capture a main subject who is African American, I may even overexpose by a full stop.

 

If you underexpose by, say, a half stop in order to get the exposure of the faces perfect, you'll lose a lot of detail in all subjects that are darker than middle gray. And with film, it is always more difficult (if not impossible) to successfully recover detail from underexposed shadows vs highlights. Having said this, there may be situations in which you want this effect - see below for example (also portra 400, pushed one stop):

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

[philipus]

Pete, thanks very much for posting the link to the interesting article. I probably missed it, but did they develop all at box speed or at the EI?

 

What I would like to see next is a test where one made use of shooting at higher-than-box-speed EI indoors or at night. Then we would really see how well the films perform. In my experience some films - even modern C41 - look really terrible when shot 2 stops over or above. And scanning such films is quite taxing, too.

 

Adam, those are excellent street shots. Wonderfully scanned too.

 

Cheers

Philip

[Stealth3kpl]

I believe the images in the first post's link were not pulled, but developed at box speed.

 

The images in this link were pushed, some up to 3200.

 

Pushing the Boundaries: Fuji 400H at 800 and 3200 | UK Film Lab

 

Pete