[someasiancameraguy]

I typically shoot my film at box ISO and don't touch the exposure compensation dial, opting to trust my camera. But recently I've heard from some that it's actually typically better to overexpose negatives by half to one stop. Is this good practice and why or why not?

[Michail_P]

When I shoot film I usually go for box ISO. Film has a lot of flexibility though, so my experience has shown that for color negative, a +\-1 compensation is nothing to worry about, if a difference in ISO is needed. I have shot 400asa film as 200 or 160 with great results. I don’t often get to underexpose , it hasn’t been necessary. Most often I try overexposing slow films by 1-1.5 stops, because I want that bit of extra shadow detail when in high contrast conditions . Highlight is easier to retrieve. As for long expired films, I tend to overexpose by at least 1 stop for the whole roll (due to sensitivity loss overtime). Same applies (for me) to chromogenic films.

[termy]

i dont know about colour 35mm film.

But for black and white, i consistently set exposure compensation at plus1 or plus1.5

It is embarassing to explain the "why".
Because, i really do not know why.
As in, i have no idea how and what to explain, the actual technicalities of that.
(I am sure many others here who are familiar with using 35mm film will be able to explain it in a way most can understand)

I do that simply because i heard from those who shot bnw film (and who advised me), to consistently overexpose by plus1 or plus1.5 when using bnw.

Thus far, i really do that when using bnw film, and images that i got from doing that all look fine.

I have always heard that 35mm film is rather tolerant, and plus or minus 1, wouldnt "kill" the image (unlike slide film, which demands much more exposure accuracy, even going off by plus or minus 0.5 might well "kill" the image).

I will think should
(1) trust the camera's exposure recommendations but

(2) of course depends on what you picked (spot metering or centre weighted or evaluated metering), and the situation you are in (backlit? Etc) and then compensate accordingly.

[othar]

But recently I've heard from some that it's actually typically better to overexpose negatives by half to one stop. Is this good practice and why or why not?

It depends on the situation for me. I usually trust the metering of the camera but for snow or backlit situations on the on side (~ +1 EV or even higher) and night pictures on the other, I compensate accordingly.

That said, with a digital sensor it is realtively easy to retrieve details in the shadows but impossible to get anything out of blown out areas, while film is as far as I am aware more like the other way around (no details in the shadows left, but not that prone to burn out details in slightly overexposed areas)

[travelswsage]

Color positive film is more forgiving than negative (slides). Generally speaking the rule in the old days was to underexpose color slide film by 1/3 stop which helped saturate and give a little extra pop to colors. The vast majority of slide films worked well at -1/3, although there were times that Velvia was best shot straight ISO as its shadows blocked up more easily than the other films. Each batch of film was usually tested in advance for crucial shoots as film could vary from one batch to another. Working pros would buy a large block of film from the same emulsion, test it, and then run the rest of that batch at whatever exposure worked best for that particular run of film. I don't have as much experience with color positive but friends shooting usually used anywhere from straight ISO to +1/2. On really important rolls of film you can always have your lab do something that was called a clip test. The lab will clip the beginning of the roll of film and develop it -- you can then tell from the results whether your exposure was on or whether you'd like the lab to develop the roll at a different exposure. Overall, though I'm sure for fun shooting you are pretty safe using the ISO of the film and only varying if you need to push film to reach a specific goal, for example, extra shutter speed in lower light conditions.

[nickthetasmaniac]

I typically shoot my film at box ISO and don't touch the exposure compensation dial, opting to trust my camera. But recently I've heard from some that it's actually typically better to overexpose negatives by half to one stop. Is this good practice and why or why not?

I think the ‘over expose colour neg’ thing has been widely misunderstood and disseminated by the new, post-digital generation of film shooters (which I’m firmly part of).

I would strongly recommend shooting (most) colour negative films at their recommended box speed. However, it is important to understand that colour neg is much better at dealing with highlights than shadows (essentially the opposite of digital).

So for me, ‘shooting at box speed’ means metering the shadows for correct exposure at box speed, which is going to leave the highlights overexposed. I think this is a more reliable and accurate approach than just saying ‘overexposed by a couple of stops’.

Regarding exposure comp. Personally, until you have your head around correct exposure, I wouldn’t be using any of the auto-exposure modes, and therefore exposure comp is redundant. Shoot manual, and pay attention to what the meter is doing when pointed at different parts of your composition. As above, pay attention to shadows. If unsure, err on the side of more light, underexposed shadows look terrible on colour neg.

As an aside, there’s a few specific conditions that will almost certainly fool your cameras meter. Snow is one (you’ll need to overexposed ~+2ev), strongly backlit subjects another (also about +2ev).

[Viking42]

I typically shoot my film at box ISO and don't touch the exposure compensation dial, opting to trust my camera. But recently I've heard from some that it's actually typically better to overexpose negatives by half to one stop. Is this good practice and why or why not?

There's no quick answer to this question. In part it depends on the film you are using. You don't say if you are talking colour or b&w? If colour negative, then yes, it is recommended to overexpose by about 1 stop to improve colours. There are some excellent videos on YouTube that demonstrate this and explain it better than I can. The exception to this is Kodak Ektar 100 which must be carefully exposed at box speed otherwise it will blow out highlights (I know this from experience ). Other colour negative films are much more forgiving.

As for black and white, which is what I mostly shoot, again it depends on the film, the developer used (big factor! not to be ignored), and your personal taste. I tend to prefer negs with more punch and guts, so set my film speed to overexpose by 1/2 to 1 stop and then develop normally as if for box speed (i.e. longer dev time than recommended for my chosen speed = higher contrast). If I wanted softer contrast I would reduce my dev time by about 10% or so.

Traditional grain films (e.g. Tri-x, HP5, FP4) tend to be more forgiving and have greater exposure latitude, so this works well for them. But tabular grain films (Delta, Tmax) are a bit more fussy about exposure and are more prone to blown highlights if you're not careful -- the most I would rate these is 1/2 stop slower (overexposed) and be very careful with my metering. All of this is also very much influenced by choice of developer, and then development time and agitation regime. Bottom line -- there are a lot of variables at play here.

I recommend just experimenting to see what you like or don't like (taking lots of notes!). That's the fun part of this hobby. A good start is to pick up two rolls of, say, Tri-x or HP5 (both very forgiving films), shoot one at box speed and the other at 1 stop slower (overexposed), picking a few of the same subjects on each roll so you can compare, then develop both rolls in the same tank at the time recommended for box speed, then see which you prefer. FYI -- doing both in the same tank eliminates agitation and developer variables.

So you see....no easy answer . But I hope this helped a bit.

Cheers,
Svend

[UncleVanya]

Color positive film is more forgiving than negative (slides). Generally speaking the rule in the old days was to underexpose color slide film by 1/3 stop which helped saturate and give a little extra pop to colors. The vast majority of slide films worked well at -1/3, although there were times that Velvia was best shot straight ISO as its shadows blocked up more easily than the other films.

I'm going to disagree. I agree with the -1/3 stop on slides, and the reason is spot on, but slide film was much more sensitive to "correct" exposure than print (reversal) film.

https://petapixel.com/2018/07/27/slide-vs-color-negative-film-how-they-compa...n-to-use-each/

Each batch of film was usually tested in advance for crucial shoots as film could vary from one batch to another. Working pros would buy a large block of film from the same emulsion, test it, and then run the rest of that batch at whatever exposure worked best for that particular run of film. I don't have as much experience with color positive but friends shooting usually used anywhere from straight ISO to +1/2. On really important rolls of film you can always have your lab do something that was called a clip test. The lab will clip the beginning of the roll of film and develop it -- you can then tell from the results whether your exposure was on or whether you'd like the lab to develop the roll at a different exposure. Overall, though I'm sure for fun shooting you are pretty safe using the ISO of the film and only varying if you need to push film to reach a specific goal, for example, extra shutter speed in lower light conditions.

This I agree with. Film processing , particularly with expired film can be a guessing game. The conditions that the film was stored in, which may be unknown to you, impact the final output. A test roll, or a test leading strip, is a good idea when practical.

[tuco]

Given most negative film has a stop of latitude, it's a moot point to bracket 1/2-stop.

[stevebrot]

Is this good practice and why or why not?

Unless you have good reason to do so for a particular subject, it is best to leave EC alone. Likewise, unless you have good reason to adjust the film speed (EI) to other than box speed (ISO), it is best meter to box speed. If neither of these make sense, it is best to stick to box speed or bracket exposure when there is a wide range of values in the frame.


Steve

[Not a Number]

Rule of thumb I was taught during the film era was negatives - expose for shadows - slides - expose for highlights.

[BigDave]

Rule of thumb I was taught during the film era was negatives - expose for shadows - slides - expose for highlights.

B&W film has about a three + stop latitude of expose, which means over exposing a stop or so will open up (give detail) in the shadows that would normally be lost. Color negative film, about 2 stops at most and color positive film, maybe a 1/2 stop, but under exposing slightly can give greater saturation, as mentioned. However with color positive film, it all depends on your subject. A dark subject is best left at posted ISOs as you can loose detail in the shadows with slide film quick. Light subjects can go gray, so you may need to bracket the exposure a bit at the extremes.

[someasiancameraguy]

Jeez this is all very confusing. Does this sound right for color negs then?

- Over developing increases exposure by pushing highlights (contrast increases) whilst decreasing film grain
- Under developing decreases exposure by reducing highlights (decreases contrast) whilst increasing film grain

- underexpose has the effect of boosting saturation and contrast, crush shadows
- overexpose decreases saturation and contrast, lifts shadows

Combined the effect is:
"Pull" - over expose, under develop - allows detail capture of high DR scenes with least risk of highlight clipping, similar to HDR
"Push" - under expose, over develop - very punchy whilst maintaining overall exposure

[stevebrot]

Jeez this is all very confusing. Does this sound right for color negs then?

- Over developing increases exposure by pushing highlights (contrast increases) whilst decreasing film grain
- Under developing decreases exposure by reducing highlights (decreases contrast) whilst increasing film grain

- underexpose has the effect of boosting saturation and contrast, crush shadows
- overexpose decreases saturation and contrast, lifts shadows

Combined the effect is:
"Pull" - over expose, under develop - allows detail capture of high DR scenes with least risk of highlight clipping, similar to HDR
"Push" - under expose, over develop - very punchy whilst maintaining overall exposure

Question: Do you have reason to believe that some or all of your photos are over or under exposed?


Steve

[someasiancameraguy]

Question: Do you have reason to believe that some or all of your photos are over or under exposed?

Steve

The metering is fairly accurate. It's just about expanding creative choices.