Shutterbug Strasse

With the kind of exposure he's making

12.235.148.108

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

(P)

In Reply to: Re: Yes , I do think it's your Lab...I forgot to ask you posted by Joe M on March 22, 2003 at 06:11:09:

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!

Follow Ups:

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)
  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)
    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)
  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)
    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:

McShane Design

You can not post to an archived thread.