Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-14-2020, 11:33 AM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 9,242
QuoteOriginally posted by aaacb Quote
Excellent points, somehow I missed that detail. I also have a black cat, this is how she looks like on tmax 400 and developed normally... indeed no shadow details, digital or film this cat is very difficult to photograph in low light, or see for that matter
If you used a one-degree spot meter and placed that black cat at zone 5 (middle grey exposure), you would indeed see the cat in much better detail at the expense of pushing any bright highlights in the scene off the chart into pure white.

12-14-2020, 11:45 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 9,242
Here is a burn't black object. Average light metering would most likely place the black object really low in value around zone 2 making it hard to see given there is bright sun in the scene. But I ignored the high values and let them fall where they may by metering for the black object and placing it near zone 5. You can see the highlights are up near zone 10+ and losing detail. It's a choice we have to make. But of course you could employ highlight compression and get more highlight and shadow detail but all frames on the roll would be subject to that processing.


12-14-2020, 12:21 PM   #18
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,021
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
Thatís a great shot and Iím sure the bright stage lighting helped. I wonder if the high contrast results achieved would show much detail in a black cat lit by available light.
I must say that I had to make my own dev chart and the result is underdeveloped...
12-14-2020, 12:24 PM - 1 Like   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 9,242
Digging through some pictures, I found this. @aaaccb is right, black cats are challenging. This is overcast light and average metering and I still got a pure black (no exposure) patchy spot on the cat. The negative actually has some faint recordable density in that area but my scan didn't pick it up I guess. I normally scan where base + fog density (unexposed area of film) on the negative = R=G=B=0 on the computer screen.

HP5+





Last edited by tuco; 12-14-2020 at 01:00 PM.
12-14-2020, 01:30 PM - 1 Like   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,647
I think given the images additional light might be the beat option. Maybe lume cubes or indirect lighting via lamps or an on camera led light and soft box?
12-14-2020, 03:01 PM   #21
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,021
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
Thatís a great shot and Iím sure the bright stage lighting helped. I wonder if the high contrast results achieved would show much detail in a black cat lit by available light.
I forgot to mention that the second shot was taken with a Sigma catadioptric 600mm F8...
12-14-2020, 03:32 PM   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,647
QuoteOriginally posted by fs999 Quote
I forgot to mention that the second shot was taken with a Sigma catadioptric 600mm F8...
Thatís a great shot.
12-14-2020, 06:30 PM   #23
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Caledon, Ontario, Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 225
Have any of you ever worked with compensating developers? They can do wonders with lifting shadow detail while keeping highlights in check. I use dilute Perceptol, a metol-only developer, which tames even high contrast films like PanF. Very dilute Rodinal behaves this way too, at 1+50 or more.

Another suggestion is to go easy on agitation when working with scenes like those under discussion here. Less agitation, and/or more gentle agitation, helps restrain highlight development without really affecting how the shadows get worked on.

These are things definitely worth experimenting with that can really help expand one's repertoire of what can be successfully rendered on film. Some more tools in the kit, in other words.

Hope this helps.

12-14-2020, 08:14 PM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 9,242
QuoteOriginally posted by Viking42 Quote
Have any of you ever worked with compensating developers?
Yes. Stand development in Rodinal at 1+100 is a classic I've used and others here too. I've developed PanF in Rodinal, PMK Pyro and D-23 1:1.
12-20-2020, 02:00 PM   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,717
QuoteOriginally posted by fs999 Quote
I have pushed HP5 to 6400 ISO developed in Microphen for 1 hour.


Looks fantastic for 6400!

Here's a full res scan from Kodak P3200 taken at 3200 and if I remember correctly I used TMAX developer. It is shown with half from RAW scan and the other half I applied a mild amount of Neat Image to address the grain some.


Full res version -> Kodak P3200 scan
12-22-2020, 05:29 AM - 2 Likes   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Norfolk, UK
Posts: 886
A really interesting thread with lots of information and advice about pushing film and developer choice but I think the easiest solution would be to swap out the cat for a ginger or tortoise shell coloured one
12-23-2020, 07:07 AM - 1 Like   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,647
QuoteOriginally posted by Vendee Quote
A really interesting thread with lots of information and advice about pushing film and developer choice but I think the easiest solution would be to swap out the cat for a ginger or tortoise shell coloured one
Thatís thinking outside the box. Are you sure your name isnít Schrodinger
12-23-2020, 07:46 AM - 1 Like   #28
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
JensE's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Leipzig
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,246
Had to check the date on the original post - listing some material which has been out of production for a while. Another recommendation for Delta 3200 + Microphen. Note that the 3200 rating is already assuming +1 development, i.e. it's actually a 1600 speed film. Best low light B&W film in my books since Neopan 1600 has been discontinued ...
12-23-2020, 09:00 AM   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Norfolk, UK
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
Thatís thinking outside the box. Are you sure your name isnít Schrodinger
Not really. The radiation which did or didn't kill the cat would certainly fog the film and would make it difficult to get good shadow detail

---------- Post added 12-23-20 at 04:02 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by JensE Quote
Had to check the date on the original post - listing some material which has been out of production for a while. Another recommendation for Delta 3200 + Microphen. Note that the 3200 rating is already assuming +1 development, i.e. it's actually a 1600 speed film. Best low light B&W film in my books since Neopan 1600 has been discontinued ...
I did love Neopan 1600. It was such a good compromise between pushing a 400 film and using a 3200 film which as you say wasn't its true speed.
12-23-2020, 12:14 PM   #30
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 12,724
QuoteOriginally posted by Vendee Quote
Not really. The radiation which did or didn't kill the cat would certainly fog the film and would make it difficult to get good shadow detail

---------- Post added 12-23-20 at 04:02 PM ----------



I did love Neopan 1600. It was such a good compromise between pushing a 400 film and using a 3200 film which as you say wasn't its true speed.
I liked Kodak High Speed Recording Film. It had grain like golf balls, but for what I wanted, that was perfect.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bw400cn, film, flash, ilford, kodak, negatives, neopan, photography, post, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Advice & Recommendation Film Viewer Light Box glee46 Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 4 06-17-2016 08:04 AM
Low priced rangefinder film camera recommendation? 6BQ5 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 16 06-01-2014 07:45 PM
People Piper, film & digital (low light, high ISOs) alan_smithee_photos Post Your Photos! 5 12-26-2013 09:53 AM
Lens Recommendation (prime) - Bokeh, Indoor, Low Light FckShoes Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 12-02-2008 08:06 PM
Da Lens Prices ! Low Low Low 247nino Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 41 04-14-2008 11:55 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:58 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top