Thanks goodness. I was afraid to ask someone what latitude mean, but fortunately you have supplied the information, and it all makes a lot of sense. Today I have half a roll of Kodak Elite, and then I want to use a print film because I am rather impatient, and also I believe there's nothing quite like holding a picture (carefully, no thumb prints!). I will definitely take a picture metered on the duck(s) so that I can see exactly what you mean in detail. I guess you could call that learning from your intended mistakes. :-P Rebekah
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 12:35 PM Subject: Re: Ducks > I always shot print film so I'm the wrong guy to ask. For print film, > you worry more about shadow detail since there are features of the > development process the inhibits the highlights from washing out. For > slides, you worry more about, i.e., expose for, the highlights. I > happened to remember that you had asked about slide film so my comments > were aimed that way. > > One easy way to view all this is that for slides the number of stops to > go from very white to very back is about 5. This is called the latitude > of the film. A simple meter will try to make the entire picture average > to middle gray. If you were to base your exposure purely on the white > duck (get really close so the white feathers filled the viewfinder) the > duck would come out gray and the rest of the picture would be too dark. > Green grass is often a good source of middle gray for most lighting, so > you could meter on that and just accept the exposure. A safer this to > do (to protect the highlights) it to meter on the white feathers and > open up a stop or two depending on how white you want those feathers to > come out. > > Of course, I'm explaining this to you in front of a lot of people who > probably understand it better than I do. Print film has a wider > latitude (more stops form black to white) so you don't have to be as > careful. Digital is a lot like slide, so I have to think more about > that now. Which is why I look a lot at the histograms. . . > >
