[gofour3]

But as others said likely better to use film that fits the conditions--iso 100 film really does cover lots of situations. BTW in 50+ years of (lots of) photography I doubt if I ever used above 1/500s--so if you need it a lot it sounds like you should rethink things.

Yeah same here, the only time I ever use 400 IOS colour film is for macro work. It gives me enough DOF and shutter speeds fast enough to "freeze" moving flowers & compensate for the extension tube light loss. I shot with Kodachrome 64 for decades and it was more than fast enough.

Phil.

[rbefly]

This is film we are talking about. You can't simply change the ISO without adjusting the development time and/or developer concentration (known as pushing or pulling). Films can only be pushed or pulled so much and there will be some degradation of the image (color shifting, grain increase, loss of highlight and/or shadow detail etc.) The amount of f-stops you can push or pull depends on the characteristics (mainly latitude) of the film. Multiple ISO films require a different development time for a given ISO. The only practical way you can change ISO with film on the fly is clip the frames and process each according to the amount of push/pull or ISO in the case of multi-ISO film. Not very practical if you think about it as you'd need a darkroom or changing bag and even so you will lose frames to make up the leader.

Hello Not a Number,
Yes, I understand that film ISO can't be changed mid-roll, in fact I shoot film myself. In the examples I specifically said "or USE iso 200 film", "Switch to Iso 100 film" etc, a reference to other adjustments that would yield the same exposure. Hopefully the OP read the 3 examples, which made this distinction, not just the first line.
Thank you for pointing out a possible misunderstanding.
Ron

[stevebrot]

the old film guys here are probably rolling their eyes

Shutter capping refers to a repairable issue where one shutter curtain is traveling faster than the other resulting in a shadow or complete light blockage at one end of the frame.


As for the OP's problem. I will join the chorus here...Shoot slower film!!!


Steve

[loco]

Thanks to everyone for the replies. Of course I understand I could just use slower film. But I was just looking for a speed that would be versatile so I could shoot indoors and outdoors. I can only hold the camera so steady! Since I can't change ISO I figured 400 with an ND filter would be a decent compromise.

After using the camera for a while I may find that I mostly enjoy outdoors shooting with it or certainly if I plan an entire day of that type of photography I would use slower film. But as I'm gingerly sticking my toe in the pool and trying this out, I thought 400 would allow me to do both.

[deus ursus]

In my experience, even 400 ASA film isn't sufficient for indoor shooting. With 800 ASA I'm starting getting "hand holdable" shutter speeds, so you might as well invest in a flash for indoor shooting. :-)

[LesDMess]

Who needs an ND filter? Unlike digitals, today's film has so much overexposure tolerance you won't even need to pull process and still get great results. As shown below, Kodak Portra 400 can achieve +10 overexposure and still have something available with a little white balance and levels although +6 or +7 is more reasonable.

Larger size -> http://www.fototime.com/3EDD4D13204247B/orig.jpg


The practical application of this is you can "level" a high contrast scene by dodging and burning areas of under and overexposure to suit your taste as in this Kodak Portra 400 shot.

Larger size -> http://www.fototime.com/DCE615918D77901/orig.jpg


Besides, Kodak Portra 400 is a very nice and versatile film.

Larger size -> http://www.fototime.com/0C47DFA07C701DB/orig.jpg

But as I'm gingerly sticking my toe in the pool and trying this out, I thought 400 would allow me to do both.

Jump right on in there as the water is fine . . .

[loco]

LOL, thanks LesDMess! That's amazing! Is it simple enough for a good photo lab to fix that type of overexposure problem, or would they not bother? Would they charge extra? At this time, I have no intention of setting up my own darkroom.

[LesDMess]

Dodging and burning the old fsshion way - in post processing using shadows or highlights tools . . .

[Jamey777]

I routinely use an ND but for shooting wide open outside. Nothing looks better than kid shots in full sunlight at f/1.x I don't think I could use my ND at f/8 if I wanted to handheld.

And they are right about the portra 400. You can run that stuff from 200 to 1600... Probably get away with 200 outside and 800 inside on the same roll. Play with it. I think most folks don't even push unless they are at 1600 and then only 1 stop....

[loco]

I routinely use an ND but for shooting wide open outside. Nothing looks better than kid shots in full sunlight at f/1.x I don't think I could use my ND at f/8 if I wanted to handheld.

And they are right about the portra 400. You can run that stuff from 200 to 1600... Probably get away with 200 outside and 800 inside on the same roll. Play with it. I think most folks don't even push unless they are at 1600 and then only 1 stop....

Thanks! I will have to get some of that stuff!

So, when "pushing" film, do you guys change the ISO setting on the camera. Say, you are using Portra 400 but you want to push it to 1600. Do you actually change the ISO setting on the camera, or do you just shoot it even though the camera is saying the photo is underexposed?

[LesDMess]

If you want to use a 400 speed as if it were 1600, you set the ISO to 1600 and you have the pro lab push process 2 stops. A 400 as 100 you set at 100 and pull process 2 stops.

Kodak Portra 400 has such wide latitude that it is not likely you have to do either for such a narrow exposure range.

Larger version -> http://www.fototime.com/B1379B2FE749C83/orig.jpg


For this example of Kodak Portra 160, I applied some scanning and post correction. It too has extreme latitude.

Larger version -> http://www.fototime.com/3736A3E18E3D020/orig.jpg



Example of Kodak BW400CN.

Larger version -> http://www.fototime.com/0A2BFD8BCB1F695/orig.jpg


I've conducted this same test on various films and generally speaking, most all negatives (C41) and b&w have extreme latitude. For those new (or renewed) into film, you might want to conduct your own test of at least + or - 2 stops just so you can be aware of your own system's tolerances and post processing requirements.

Knowing this, you can apply it in your own photography much like knowing post work with RAW files. For instance, I came upon this scene that my meter indicated needed 1/60 but I wanted 1/2 to slow the water down. Of course I didn't have - nor need, ND filters since I knew that Kodak Ektar's latitude will allow me to get good results so I shot the scene as I wanted.

[dms]

Vis-a-vis the last shot of the creek/fast water if center weighted exposure was used (metering the center of the scene) it likely is at +2.5~3 e.v., so rather than 1/60s, the proper exposure is about 1/8s, so at 1/2s it is overexposed about 2 stops. Which is fine for most situations (and very good for this scene as the fast water can be perfect w/o any detail (as it has no detail) and the surrounding dark rocks can use it--but no way can you expect good results if you generally overexpose by 5 stops as is suggested.

[loco]

Wow, this thread is a real education for me! I really appreciate all the info and examples. Thanks to everyone! I'm really looking forward to getting out and experimenting. In the meantime, I just finished shooting my first roll. Hoping whatever problems I see in the photos are all user related.

[LesDMess]

I would not normally tell a newbie to use film in it's extremes but with a name like "loco" and a flicker stream like you have, I think you will be fine doing it. Of course like DMS recommended, there is nothing wrong with taking a conservative approach and shooting at box speed. Me I just like using shutter speeds far in excess of 1/500 as well as extremely long durations hours long . . .


BTW, basically all post processing work you know of can be applied to film too.

Stitching 4 frames of Kodak Ektar 100.

Larger version -> http://www.fototime.com/AF9F7B335AA39A5/orig.jpg


HDR using one frame of Fuji RVP100

Larger version -> http://www.fototime.com/893E0E37B4C4087/orig.jpg


Grain reduction of Fuji Press 1600 film.

Larger version -> http://www.fototime.com/96DFC2A35FE7DA6/orig.jpg


Good luck and have fun!

[loco]

Amazing! And here I thought I'd be losing control of the processing part of things. Great work, Les, and thanks for the kind words!