Shutterbug Strasse

Just to be clear...

65.163.86.2

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display Email ] [ Shutterbug Strasse ] [ FAQ ]

SpinJack

(A)

In Reply to: Re: Low Light Question posted by butt-out on March 21, 2003 at 13:37:03:

You think it might be a development problem rather than a camera settings problem?
Also, I've never used spot metering. Not sure how to use spot metering.

Follow Ups:

Yes , I do think it's your Lab... - butt-out 15:01:11 03/21/03 (7)
Years ago when I started out, for the life of me, I couldn't figure out what I was doing wrong with my exposures on print film. That is until I shot on cromes or slides.I began to see correct exposures.But with print films your put at the mercy of whoever is making up the prints on the auto printer.If they are more experienced they will know when to make adjustments.
Put the N70 into spot meter and point the center part of your lens at what is the important part of the shot (the glow in this case) and use those f stops.
- Re: Yes , I do think it's your Lab...I forgot to ask you - Joe M 06:11:09 03/22/03 (6)
  Have you looked at your negs ? Are they very thin and clear or Full of snap ,contrasty and dark.
  Real thin almost disappearing image is bad, and hard for anyone to print up.Means you were severly underexposing . Let the Lab operator tell you what they think about the negs before reprinting.
  - With the kind of exposure he's making - jj 08:57:41 03/22/03 (5)
    He's going to have reddish-orange coloration due to color temp.
    Also, the area around the heaters will be the only part that is really exposed, so if he sees decent detail in the negs about the heaters, he's got his exposure (of course anythign clear in the neg should wind up black).
    If the neg isn't winding up black background, the printer has pushed the exposure automatically in a machine without looking. I've had people tell me that they couldn't do anything else (because they didn't know how to use the machine).
    If that's the case, and the negs do look reasonable, he'll have to go to a pro printer to get them done.
    If the negs are thin even in the part that is exposed, then he needs to worry about reciprocity, probably.
    -- Do not seek the treasure! DO NOT SEEK THE TREASURE!
    - Re: With the kind of exposure he's making - TimP 09:55:49 03/22/03 (4)
      I did the same thing a while back with a digital camera (Nikon 5700) and the exposures were around 8 seconds at f4 at ASA100. It's hard to see from this small one but they came out well, with a near black background, and brightly lit tube internals.
      
      Tim
      - Developing - SpinJack 13:53:45 03/26/03 (1)
        
        In Reply to: Re: With the kind of exposure he's making posted by TimP on March 22, 2003 at 09:55:49:
        
        As it turns out, much of the problem was in the developing. I went down to the local Wolf and had them do some reprints. I explained what I was after and they came back just about perfect. I'll post the results in a couple days.
        I'll try the metering thing (I'll have to dig out the owners manual). I tried a second batch with 400 speed film. Those were aweful. I'll use 100 next time and try manual exposures.
        Nice photo, TimP. That is pretty much what I was after.
        Thanks for all the comments.
        
        Um, just to clarify... - jj 19:42:57 03/26/03 (0)
        
        In Reply to: Developing posted by Spinjack on March 26, 2003 at 13:53:45:
        
        It's printing that was messed up, if they could do some reprints and get them right.
        It's probably that the first people who printed them averaged. It's what machines do without a human leading them.
        It sounds like the second operator knew, partially perhaps you pointed out the problems, that he needed to manually print the shots.
        "Developing" would usually involve the latent images on the film, although of course prints must be developed, too. Thing is, the problem in printing is usually the exposure, not the development, well, unless you're one of a few places I've had the misfortune to visit, once each.
        -- Do not seek the treasure! DO NOT SEEK THE TREASURE!
      - ??? for TimP - Joe M 09:51:46 03/24/03 (1)
        
        In Reply to: Re: With the kind of exposure he's making posted by TimP on March 22, 2003 at 09:55:49:
        
        I thought I read that the Nikon 5700 doesn't have a manual focus setting.Do you find that somewhat troublesome, if true?
        I've been recommending that model to some friends.
        
        Re: ??? for TimP - TimP 08:16:38 03/27/03 (0)
        
        In Reply to: ??? for TimP posted by Joe M on March 24, 2003 at 09:51:46:
        
        Hi Joe:
        The 5700 does have manual focus capability, but it's not the most convenient. One major complaint is that there is no "numerical" readout showing the focus distance- just a small bar graph that is relative. There is an electronic mode that simulates a "split prism" and shows the focus in the electronic viewfinder but it has it's limitations in daylight.
        Of all the "Prosumer" cameras I have played with I think the 5700 is among the best of the lot, if not THE best. I shot some terrific pictures with it. I sold it and bought a DSLR which I shoot daily, but many times I wish I had kept the 5700 for quick shots and times when it's zoom is more convenient than changing lenses. I can see myself possibly buying another for that purpose.
        Greetings from Alaska
        Tim

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Sonic Craft

You can not post to an archived thread.