We and our partners use technologies, such as cookies, to recognize you and show you more of what you like. Please read our Privacy Policy to learn more. By using this website you agree to the use of those technologies.
I agree.
Welcome to Ogden - Diptych to demonstrate gamma infinity theory
Comparison on the gamma infinity theory. The left was metered off the building and shot about 1/60 the shot on the right was done right after metered off the "O" in the sign and shot at about 1/250. Then stand developed in a compensation developer at high dilution - these are directly as scanned. The deciding factor for me is the frost on the roof of the building. It comes up better in the second photo and none of the shadow detail is lost. Sunrise shot on Plus-X Pan. Scanned as color. Photoshop pulls some of the color frequencies which aren't always correct, but they are interesting. Colorizing in post. Cool morning that ended in snow. Kodak Plus-X Pan (125) from 1981. Shot at ISO 80. No problem. Stand developed for 64 minutes in homebrewed Kalogen (1:150 dilution). Nikon N90s with a hacked Soligor 35mm lens in T4 mount. Part of this is to test some theories (mostly not mine) about metering and stand development to get to "gamma infinity" Interesting first test.
@charliedontsurf So in theory as I get it from Ed Lowe and Mortensen, pushing or pulling will change the exposure universally. Then when you print the negative it is adusted to normal exposure. When you look at the picture here, Both shot at the same ISO and developed the same, you see where the frost on the top of the car is much better exposed where it is more subdued when metered for the lower light/shadows. In order to bring those up in the print you'd have to blow out some of the highlights potentially or have to dodge, etc. The point of this is that the Highlights don't get blown out and then the shadows are compensated in the stand development. It's not instinctive to me, but I can see the issues here. Yes portraiture with fixed/controlled lighting is way easier to use these tactics. But I think in the right lighting outdoors - overcast in this case, the technique has its merits. Besides I never would have even noticed the frost on the cars....
Mortensen said the negative will be different/lighter but his asthetic was that negatives were too heavy and too exposed to begin with but that is part of social taste. I might agree with him however
@charliedontsurf also, pushing is essentially uniform for each shot, although in B&W and stand dev we can probably push/pull each shot individually. The difference in highlights between shots may not be as great or might not matter where, in that case, pushing the roll will change the exposure even when not necessary. I am still working to understand all this the problem is that it makes sense to me. Lol....
@charliedontsurf Well, what is interesting, since I'm using the spot metering on the Nikon to play with this. The Nikon "metered" both of those and I had to lock the exposure to get the second scene. And something I am considering is if modern cameras have this figured out in matrix metering. The other part is I wonder if the first shot is "correctly" metered and then underdeveloped through the dilution/stand process and the second picture is actually closer to normal or somewhat underexposed and then normally developed due to the same process. I don't know if that is possible, except that it happens in stand development. I'm not so keen on reading negatives because I kind of just like what I like. I don't know much the difference between underexposure and underdevelopment. I'm still trying to match the theory up with my experience . As I said, most of this may just be computed by the camera in full matrix metering, but I'm trying to figure out how to have more deliberate control.
@charliedontsurf don't laugh but all the effort I put in to what I wanted to meter off in the second shot was met with I totally paid no attention to where I metered off the building in the first "control" shot. Lol so much for science
@mike1allison then its quite possible that you were metering for the sky, hence it looking underexposed lol.! Do you think that its easy to over think this stuff sometimes? I know that I tie my brain in knots sometimes when I'm trying to get that mythical best exposure and that my most rewarding stuff comes out of my oly pen which I shoot in a most gung ho fashion, sans meter, just my eyes judging the light. If you think about it in normal daylight hours you're going to be at the most 2 stops out if you shoot everything at f8 with shutter speed matching the film speed, more like 1 stop if you factor in experience, so little does it matter really. Probably most of our errors occur with development, bad scanning or printing which is why I am erring on the side of over development at the moment. My latest roll is drying now, 1+50 for 20 minutes and the negs look great.
@charliedontsurf definitely. It's really a theoretical exercise for me more to understand stuff. Because a lot of times I shoot from the hip. Short lens that I can get 10m to infinity at f8. Shutter speed be damned. If i see something that needs real composition i can stop and compose. But with few people and activities going on right now, some of this mental diddling can be fun. And im learning what control I do have. I honestly believe that a camera with 13 weighted metering points is probably going to get a better shot than I can. Modern film has such enormous range and then digital post process almost gets you everything else. But I think there is still plenty of deliberate art and science to employ. I mean running a 40 year old 125 iso film at 80 or 100 is pretty cool. And there may be a developer or two that may deliver more.
It's all fun. And I want as much deliberate control as I can learn.
And no I wasn't metering off the sky by accident. Lol probably the newspaper in the rack lol!
Thanks for your thoughts. It's fun even when it fails or you guess wrong! Or accidentally meter off the sky!
@mike1allison I think when indoors or in really bad light an accurate meter is indispensable but when outside in good to middling light it can be a hindrance. I've lost many a good shot to an aperture priority camera metering to the highlights, i.e. the sky mostly. You are right in that half the fun in shooting expired film is trying to shoot it as fast as possible. Unfortunately due to my inherent laziness I've never branched out behond rodinal so I maybe I haven't really found the best developer for my stocks. New years resolution.....
8 個留言