Accidental over-exposure

LesDMess · 06-15-2021, 05:44 PM

Originally posted by womble

I just told the lab that I had accidentally metered at 100 rather than 400 and could they compensate. I have no idea what they actually did, but have just downloaded the scans and they look fine.

As to be expected given the huge latitude of that film. If there is any sign of overexposure it is most likely because of the scan itself.

BTW, looks great!

womble · 06-15-2021, 11:49 PM

Originally posted by LesDMess

As to be expected given the huge latitude of that film. If there is any sign of overexposure it is most likely because of the scan itself.

BTW, looks great!

The negs look great too. I think they must have compensated a bit, and I'm pretty pleased. I might try pulling Tri-X again someday, but deliberately this time!

K.

aaacb · 06-19-2021, 10:03 AM

Looks great, wouldn't know about it just from the photo. On a tangent, this is why I sometimes like using sunny 16 to expose film, if you're not very picky and looking closely there's a lot of room for error and it's fun to see an image from your guesses.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Accidental Double Exposure	KarlaAnn	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	5	08-09-2020 03:42 AM
Accidental Underexposure	ThorSanchez	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	02-23-2020 05:21 AM
Abstract Accidental Scene	Dewman	Post Your Photos!	9	01-10-2020 03:25 AM
Thematic Those Happy Accidental Photos	BrianR	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	13	09-25-2018 02:56 PM
Not Work-Safe Epic accidental multiple exposure (film, NSFW)	alan_smithee_photos	Post Your Photos!	7	08-16-2015 01:41 AM

06-15-2021, 05:44 PM	#16
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by womble I just told the lab that I had accidentally metered at 100 rather than 400 and could they compensate. I have no idea what they actually did, but have just downloaded the scans and they look fine. As to be expected given the huge latitude of that film. If there is any sign of overexposure it is most likely because of the scan itself. BTW, looks great!

06-15-2021, 11:49 PM	#17
womble Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Hertfordshire Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,324 Original Poster	Originally posted by LesDMess As to be expected given the huge latitude of that film. If there is any sign of overexposure it is most likely because of the scan itself. BTW, looks great! The negs look great too. I think they must have compensated a bit, and I'm pretty pleased. I might try pulling Tri-X again someday, but deliberately this time! K.

06-19-2021, 10:03 AM	#18
aaacb Pentaxian Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,724	Looks great, wouldn't know about it just from the photo. On a tangent, this is why I sometimes like using sunny 16 to expose film, if you're not very picky and looking closely there's a lot of room for error and it's fun to see an image from your guesses.