Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Incident light meters work well too. On 2/9/2011 9:40 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Dammit! I knew I was forgetting something last time I left the camera shop! Been meaning to get one of those for a while. I've clearly got a lot to learn, and appreciate all the help everyone's giving me. Thanks, Paul. On 2/9/2011 8:34 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: If the scene you're shooting is primarily snow covered, you should overexpose by about two stops. At a centered meter reading, you'll get gray snow. The alternative is to take your meter reading from a gray card. Paul -- Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom! --Marvin the Martian. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
The problem with an incident light meter is that the measurement should, though it doesn't have to be, depending on conditions, be made from the /subject/ location. On 2/9/2011 10:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. No. It's not amount the amount of light. The reason you overexpose snow or anything else that fills your frame with white is simply because it's white and very reflective. Like Collin said, the meter assumes everything is 18% gray and reflects the amount of light that an 18% gray surface would reflect. So shooting a white subject in low light, you would still overexpose. Shooting something totally black, you would want to underexpose by about one stop, since black doesn't reflect much light.. Again, using the gray card and exposing to the meter reading is usually better in really tricky lighting situations. Another alternative is an incident meter, which measures the light source rather than the scene. As with the gray card, you don't have to correct for the reflectivity of the subject when shooting with an incident meter. Paul Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 8:40 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom! --Marvin the Martian. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Pentax has a newly scanned, (the old scans pretty much killed all of the example photos, the new ones are much better), K1000 manual on line in PDF. http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/manual/K1000%20Instruction%20Manual.pdf On 2/11/2011 4:05 AM, Thibouille wrote: Hey that's funny, John. I didn't know KM and K1000 was 'Full frame' metering instead of CWA, as I assumed. Interesting :) Learnt something. -- Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom! --Marvin the Martian. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
The problem with an incident light meter is that the measurement should, though it doesn't have to be, depending on conditions, be made from the /subject/ location. in my experience that's rarely necessary - you can usually find some light right where you are which is the same as that falling on the subject. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On 3/6/2011 2:36 PM, Bob W wrote: The problem with an incident light meter is that the measurement should, though it doesn't have to be, depending on conditions, be made from the /subject/ location. in my experience that's rarely necessary - you can usually find some light right where you are which is the same as that falling on the subject. B I thought I implied that, Oh, well. -- Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom! --Marvin the Martian. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On 04/03/2011 14:13, Bob Sullivan wrote: Thanks Mike, I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light. Regards, Bob S. The temptation to say aperture simulator is almost overwhelming. On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM, mike wilsonm.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 04/03/2011 00:22, Bob Sullivan wrote: Well Mike, now I've got to check. I judged by feel as I still have a roll in the LX. The *ist DS is relatively light but not the K-10, K-20, K-7 or K-5. Regards, Bob S. LX = 565g (inc FA1) DS = 605g K7/5 = 670g K10 = 793g K20 = 900g Kx = 515g DL2 = 470g On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:17 PM, mike wilsonm.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 02/03/2011 04:30, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jens, The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands. I was going to take issue with you over this but, checking numbers, I find that _my_ (sorry, Bob) two DSLRs are in the minority in being lighter than the LX, with one being significantly lighter than any of the rest of the range and weighing nearly 25% less than the LX. Now I wonder if the lenses are an additional factor to take into account. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
mike wilson wrote: On 04/03/2011 14:13, Bob Sullivan wrote: Thanks Mike, I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light. Regards, Bob S. The temptation to say aperture simulator is almost overwhelming. steady on...! ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Thanks Mike, I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light. Regards, Bob S. On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 04/03/2011 00:22, Bob Sullivan wrote: Well Mike, now I've got to check. I judged by feel as I still have a roll in the LX. The *ist DS is relatively light but not the K-10, K-20, K-7 or K-5. Regards, Bob S. LX = 565g (inc FA1) DS = 605g K7/5 = 670g K10 = 793g K20 = 900g Kx = 515g DL2 = 470g On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:17 PM, mike wilsonm.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 02/03/2011 04:30, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jens, The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands. I was going to take issue with you over this but, checking numbers, I find that _my_ (sorry, Bob) two DSLRs are in the minority in being lighter than the LX, with one being significantly lighter than any of the rest of the range and weighing nearly 25% less than the LX. Now I wonder if the lenses are an additional factor to take into account. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light. Regards, Bob S. Penta-mirror instead of a proper prism? kris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Mar 4, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Krisjanis Linkevics wrote: Penta-mirror instead of a proper prism? K-x doesn't have a prism? What about K-r? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
The K-x and DL cameras lack a Pentaprism, getting rid of the glass would account for it On 3/4/2011 8:13 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Thanks Mike, I wonder why the Kx and DL2 are so light. Regards, Bob S. On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM, mike wilsonm.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 04/03/2011 00:22, Bob Sullivan wrote: Well Mike, now I've got to check. I judged by feel as I still have a roll in the LX. The *ist DS is relatively light but not the K-10, K-20, K-7 or K-5. Regards, Bob S. LX = 565g (inc FA1) DS = 605g K7/5 = 670g K10 = 793g K20 = 900g Kx = 515g DL2 = 470g On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:17 PM, mike wilsonm.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 02/03/2011 04:30, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jens, The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands. I was going to take issue with you over this but, checking numbers, I find that _my_ (sorry, Bob) two DSLRs are in the minority in being lighter than the LX, with one being significantly lighter than any of the rest of the range and weighing nearly 25% less than the LX. Now I wonder if the lenses are an additional factor to take into account. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom! --Marvin the Martian. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Like the K-x it's all done with mirrors... On 3/4/2011 10:07 AM, Eric Weir wrote: On Mar 4, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Krisjanis Linkevics wrote: Penta-mirror instead of a proper prism? K-x doesn't have a prism? What about K-r? -- Eric Weir Decatur, GA USA eew...@bellsouth.net -- Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom! --Marvin the Martian. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On 02/03/2011 04:30, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jens, The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands. I was going to take issue with you over this but, checking numbers, I find that _my_ (sorry, Bob) two DSLRs are in the minority in being lighter than the LX, with one being significantly lighter than any of the rest of the range and weighing nearly 25% less than the LX. Now I wonder if the lenses are an additional factor to take into account. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Well Mike, now I've got to check. I judged by feel as I still have a roll in the LX. The *ist DS is relatively light but not the K-10, K-20, K-7 or K-5. Regards, Bob S. On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:17 PM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 02/03/2011 04:30, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jens, The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands. I was going to take issue with you over this but, checking numbers, I find that _my_ (sorry, Bob) two DSLRs are in the minority in being lighter than the LX, with one being significantly lighter than any of the rest of the range and weighing nearly 25% less than the LX. Now I wonder if the lenses are an additional factor to take into account. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On 04/03/2011 00:22, Bob Sullivan wrote: Well Mike, now I've got to check. I judged by feel as I still have a roll in the LX. The *ist DS is relatively light but not the K-10, K-20, K-7 or K-5. Regards, Bob S. LX = 565g (inc FA1) DS = 605g K7/5 = 670g K10 = 793g K20 = 900g Kx = 515g DL2 = 470g On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:17 PM, mike wilsonm.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 02/03/2011 04:30, Bob Sullivan wrote: Jens, The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands. I was going to take issue with you over this but, checking numbers, I find that _my_ (sorry, Bob) two DSLRs are in the minority in being lighter than the LX, with one being significantly lighter than any of the rest of the range and weighing nearly 25% less than the LX. Now I wonder if the lenses are an additional factor to take into account. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: RE: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Well... You get the film developed. Use a pro lab or similar. Then get the film scanned. Use a the good old Nikon Coolscan - mine is a Coolscan 4000 ED. Not bad at all. Or use a lab of great reputation. Then edit your images in Photoshop or any equivalent image editor (GIMP). This is what I do. I found out, that the scanning is everything. I initially scanned my Pentax 67 shots myself using my Epson 3200 Perfection flatbed scanner. This is simply not good enough. A true film scanner really makes a big difference. I'd like to buy a Nikon Coolscan 9000. But they are too expensive. So, Iøll send my best shot to a lab using this Nikon scanner or an Imacon scanner. A have yet to see the result of this. But when I use my flatbed scanner I can get no better resolution than a 14 MP digital camera. That's not good enough, I think. I am buying a great looking Pentax LX (reparied from the sticky mirror syndrom i Japan) this week :-) When I joined the PDML 10 years ago or so, everybody was going on and on about the great Pentax LX. I recently got a K2, a K1000 and a Pentax ES. And now I'm really looking foreward to getting some 35mm tolls back from my favorite lab :-). Regards Jens -- Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself. On Feb 9, 2011 20:29 John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Walter Gilbert So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound (didn't realize I had to press the button on the bottom plate), and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 3 rolls BW400CN 4 rolls UltraMax 400 What do I need to know from here? The Plus-X is a traditional BW film. The BW400CN UltraMax 400 are Process C-41 (color negative like from a one hour mini-lab). If you take the Plus-X to a mini-lab it will mess up the film. Same thing if you try to develop the other two using traditional BW chemistry. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3431 - Release Date: 02/08/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: RE: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Jens, The LX will be incredibly small and light in your hands. Move fast, be decisive, capture the moment.. Regards, Bob S. On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Jens p...@planfoto.dk wrote: Well... You get the film developed. Use a pro lab or similar. Then get the film scanned. Use a the good old Nikon Coolscan - mine is a Coolscan 4000 ED. Not bad at all. Or use a lab of great reputation. Then edit your images in Photoshop or any equivalent image editor (GIMP). This is what I do. I found out, that the scanning is everything. I initially scanned my Pentax 67 shots myself using my Epson 3200 Perfection flatbed scanner. This is simply not good enough. A true film scanner really makes a big difference. I'd like to buy a Nikon Coolscan 9000. But they are too expensive. So, Iøll send my best shot to a lab using this Nikon scanner or an Imacon scanner. A have yet to see the result of this. But when I use my flatbed scanner I can get no better resolution than a 14 MP digital camera. That's not good enough, I think. I am buying a great looking Pentax LX (reparied from the sticky mirror syndrom i Japan) this week :-) When I joined the PDML 10 years ago or so, everybody was going on and on about the great Pentax LX. I recently got a K2, a K1000 and a Pentax ES. And now I'm really looking foreward to getting some 35mm tolls back from my favorite lab :-). Regards Jens -- Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself. On Feb 9, 2011 20:29 John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Walter Gilbert So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound (didn't realize I had to press the button on the bottom plate), and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 3 rolls BW400CN 4 rolls UltraMax 400 What do I need to know from here? The Plus-X is a traditional BW film. The BW400CN UltraMax 400 are Process C-41 (color negative like from a one hour mini-lab). If you take the Plus-X to a mini-lab it will mess up the film. Same thing if you try to develop the other two using traditional BW chemistry. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3431 - Release Date: 02/08/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Walt, the Plus-X should be fine. When I first started using it, I lived on a tropical island where supplies arrived by boat every three months at minimum, and the films then stayed unrefrigerated until used. Never had an issue with it! Heat can foul it up, but it has to be something like leaving the film in the glove box of your car while it is in the sun (which I will confess to having done when young and unaware!). John Coyle Brisbane, Australia -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walter Gilbert Sent: Thursday, 10 February 2011 7:56 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting I just happened to notice last night, after I sent this message, that the Plus-X wasn't C-41 process film. I think the shop where I bought it will process it, though. I still don't have a dark room or supplies -- nor a tank or dark bag -- to work with, so I'll have to have all my film processed for the time being. But, once I get to the point where I feel I can get enough good shots with film to justify the investment, I'll probably start doing my own development. BTW -- I did note that the date stamp on the Plus-X box is 01/2010. I assume that's the expiration date and not the date of manufacture. With that in mind, I can't help wondering if it's still worth shooting. The shop had it on a shelf, not refrigerated at all. I assume there's some leeway with the expiration dates, but a year sounds a bit much. Thanks for the pointers WRT the developing chemicals. I'll archive this email for use at a later date. -- Walt On 2/9/2011 12:55 AM, John Coyle wrote: Hi Walt - I used to use Plus-X extensively, and always developed it myself in Acutol or Microdol-X. Acutol gives very fine grain and high acutance (as the name implies) with lovely smooth tone gradation. Microdol-X is designed to give very sharp negatives, perhaps a little more grain and contrast than Acutol. I normally rated it at 200ASA, but it's worth testing a roll or two with your own gear to see what suits you best. To save film, you could expose half-dozen frames on a roll at 80, 125 and 200 ASA for each set , then develop the roll normally to see which works best. You can push Plus-X quite hard, but the quality begins to drop off at over 400ASA, I found. I never much liked 400CN, couldn't seem to get really black and white negs, always a little tinge of colour left. Haven't used UltraMax, so can't help you there! HTH John Coyle Brisbane, Australia -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walter Gilbert Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 2:23 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Advice solicitation for analog shooting So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound (didn't realize I had to press the button on the bottom plate), and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 3 rolls BW400CN 4 rolls UltraMax 400 What do I need to know from here? Thanks! Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Hey that's funny, John. I didn't know KM and K1000 was 'Full frame' metering instead of CWA, as I assumed. Interesting :) Learnt something. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs -- Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45, DA50-135, DA50-200, 360FGZ KX, MX, SuperA+Motor, Z1, P30 Mamiya C330+80/2.8 Sekonic L-208 FalconEyes TE300D x2 Studio flashes Laptop: Macbook 13 Unibody SnowLeo/Win7 Programing: Delphi 2009 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Walter, about those metering and mid gray things. A simple but very effective thing our teacher asked us: Take a pic of a white object (like sheets of paper), a gray object and a black object. To stay simple, the three objects will have about the same color (gray of course). This is simple and clearly nails the problem. A built-in meter (and any meter used in reflective metering), even how modern it is, is always influenced by color and reflection power of the metered object. 2011/2/10 Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com: Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 8:40 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs -- Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45, DA50-135, DA50-200, 360FGZ KX, MX, SuperA+Motor, Z1, P30 Mamiya C330+80/2.8 Sekonic L-208 FalconEyes TE300D x2 Studio flashes Laptop: Macbook 13 Unibody SnowLeo/Win7 Programing: Delphi 2009 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Collin Brendemuehl coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote: -Original Message- From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 01:57 PM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote: The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. Frank and i cannot use this method. We wear gloves most of the year. Dave Really. Canadian? or you living in Tulsa today? Nope still here. I just wear them when i unlock my bus. I hate it when the key freezes to my hand. Dave Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
The exercise they had us do was to mount three 8x10 cards together - white+gray+black. Then we had to photograph the three cards using reflected-light metering on the white, bracketing -2, -1, 0, +1, +2; ... on the gray, bracketing; ... on the black, bracketing. All shots had to be produced in one session so that all the exposures were in the same light. Direct sunlight was specified for the first time out. After processing the film, we had to produce a contact sheet printed to base+fog (so that you could just barely see the difference between black and the edge of the film). From: Thibouille Walter, about those metering and mid gray things. A simple but very effective thing our teacher asked us: Take a pic of a white object (like sheets of paper), a gray object and a black object. To stay simple, the three objects will have about the same color (gray of course). This is simple and clearly nails the problem. A built-in meter (and any meter used in reflective metering), even how modern it is, is always influenced by color and reflection power of the metered object. 2011/2/10 Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com: ? Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. ?But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3435 - Release Date: 02/10/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
From: Walter Gilbert Thanks, David/Collin/Paul. I think I understand, now. I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the subject isn't the snow itself. But, as I understand you all now, as long as there's a dark enough counterpoint to the snow within the frame, the metering will average out. My question in that case is, does the ratio of dark to light matter? Say, if you have a snowy field and a small black dog in that field, taking a photo of a distant grey object, is that enough to get the correct averaging? Or do I need to compensate for the dominance of the snowy field within the frame? In other words, does the meter average the difference between the darkest and the brightest objects in the frame, or the total amount of darkness and brightness in the frame? Thanks again, y'all. I do appreciate your patience. If I remember correctly, you started this thread that you're shooting with a K1000? The K1000 meter averages the entire frame. No additional weight is given to the center. If the scene is mostly brighter than 18% gray, the meter recommendation will be under-exposed, you have to over-expose to compensate and get the correct exposure. If the scene is mostly darker, the meter recommendation is over-exposed, and you have to under-expose to compensate. Blue skies opposite the sun, sunlit grass and weathered asphalt paving are all reasonable approximations of 18% gray. If nothing else, fill the viewfinder with one of these and set your exposure, then re-frame the scene. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3433 - Release Date: 02/09/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Thanks for the tips, John! I'll give those a try this evening and see what I come up with. -- Walt On 2/10/2011 9:31 AM, John Sessoms wrote: From: Walter Gilbert Thanks, David/Collin/Paul. I think I understand, now. I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the subject isn't the snow itself. But, as I understand you all now, as long as there's a dark enough counterpoint to the snow within the frame, the metering will average out. My question in that case is, does the ratio of dark to light matter? Say, if you have a snowy field and a small black dog in that field, taking a photo of a distant grey object, is that enough to get the correct averaging? Or do I need to compensate for the dominance of the snowy field within the frame? In other words, does the meter average the difference between the darkest and the brightest objects in the frame, or the total amount of darkness and brightness in the frame? Thanks again, y'all. I do appreciate your patience. If I remember correctly, you started this thread that you're shooting with a K1000? The K1000 meter averages the entire frame. No additional weight is given to the center. If the scene is mostly brighter than 18% gray, the meter recommendation will be under-exposed, you have to over-expose to compensate and get the correct exposure. If the scene is mostly darker, the meter recommendation is over-exposed, and you have to under-expose to compensate. Blue skies opposite the sun, sunlit grass and weathered asphalt paving are all reasonable approximations of 18% gray. If nothing else, fill the viewfinder with one of these and set your exposure, then re-frame the scene. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3433 - Release Date: 02/09/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:31 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Walter Gilbert Thanks, David/Collin/Paul. I think I understand, now. I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the subject isn't the snow itself. But, as I understand you all now, as long as there's a dark enough counterpoint to the snow within the frame, the metering will average out. My question in that case is, does the ratio of dark to light matter? Say, if you have a snowy field and a small black dog in that field, taking a photo of a distant grey object, is that enough to get the correct averaging? Or do I need to compensate for the dominance of the snowy field within the frame? In other words, does the meter average the difference between the darkest and the brightest objects in the frame, or the total amount of darkness and brightness in the frame? Thanks again, y'all. I do appreciate your patience. If I remember correctly, you started this thread that you're shooting with a K1000? The K1000 meter averages the entire frame. No additional weight is given to the center. If the scene is mostly brighter than 18% gray, the meter recommendation will be under-exposed, you have to over-expose to compensate and get the correct exposure. If the scene is mostly darker, the meter recommendation is over-exposed, and you have to under-expose to compensate. Blue skies opposite the sun, sunlit grass and weathered asphalt paving are all reasonable approximations of 18% gray. If nothing else, fill the viewfinder with one of these and set your exposure, then re-frame the scene. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3433 - Release Date: 02/09/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote: The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. Frank and i cannot use this method. We wear gloves most of the year. Dave On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:31 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Walter Gilbert Thanks, David/Collin/Paul. I think I understand, now. I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the subject isn't the snow itself. But, as I understand you all now, as long as there's a dark enough counterpoint to the snow within the frame, the metering will average out. My question in that case is, does the ratio of dark to light matter? Say, if you have a snowy field and a small black dog in that field, taking a photo of a distant grey object, is that enough to get the correct averaging? Or do I need to compensate for the dominance of the snowy field within the frame? In other words, does the meter average the difference between the darkest and the brightest objects in the frame, or the total amount of darkness and brightness in the frame? Thanks again, y'all. I do appreciate your patience. If I remember correctly, you started this thread that you're shooting with a K1000? The K1000 meter averages the entire frame. No additional weight is given to the center. If the scene is mostly brighter than 18% gray, the meter recommendation will be under-exposed, you have to over-expose to compensate and get the correct exposure. If the scene is mostly darker, the meter recommendation is over-exposed, and you have to under-expose to compensate. Blue skies opposite the sun, sunlit grass and weathered asphalt paving are all reasonable approximations of 18% gray. If nothing else, fill the viewfinder with one of these and set your exposure, then re-frame the scene. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3433 - Release Date: 02/09/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
-Original Message- From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 01:57 PM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote: The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. Frank and i cannot use this method. We wear gloves most of the year. Dave Really. Canadian? or you living in Tulsa today? Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
From: David Parsons The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. Unless you have really dark hair. ;-D - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3433 - Release Date: 02/09/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Honky hands, like mine, will generally put you one stop under. But that works. I can do the math for one stop:-). Paul On Feb 10, 2011, at 2:25 PM, John Sessoms wrote: From: David Parsons The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. Unless you have really dark hair. ;-D - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3433 - Release Date: 02/09/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Ha! The most reliable of all appendages. On 2/10/2011 1:25 PM, John Sessoms wrote: From: David Parsons The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. Unless you have really dark hair. ;-D - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3433 - Release Date: 02/09/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote: The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. Frank and i cannot use this method. We wear gloves most of the year. get some 18% gloves. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 01:57:55PM -0500, David J Brooks wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:02 PM, David Parsons parsons.da...@gmail.com wrote: The palm of your hand is also reasonably close to 18% as well. Frank and i cannot use this method. We wear gloves most of the year. Dave My bike gloves have nice little leather palm pieces, pretty close to 18% grey. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
From: Walter Gilbert So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound (didn't realize I had to press the button on the bottom plate), and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 3 rolls BW400CN 4 rolls UltraMax 400 What do I need to know from here? The Plus-X is a traditional BW film. The BW400CN UltraMax 400 are Process C-41 (color negative like from a one hour mini-lab). If you take the Plus-X to a mini-lab it will mess up the film. Same thing if you try to develop the other two using traditional BW chemistry. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3431 - Release Date: 02/08/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Feb 8, 2011, at 22:23, Walter Gilbert wrote: So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound (didn't realize I had to press the button on the bottom plate), and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. One suggestion - now that you have an exposed/trashed roll of film... practice loading, winding, and rewinding with that roll. You don't even have to close the back of the camera. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
I just happened to notice last night, after I sent this message, that the Plus-X wasn't C-41 process film. I think the shop where I bought it will process it, though. I still don't have a dark room or supplies -- nor a tank or dark bag -- to work with, so I'll have to have all my film processed for the time being. But, once I get to the point where I feel I can get enough good shots with film to justify the investment, I'll probably start doing my own development. BTW -- I did note that the date stamp on the Plus-X box is 01/2010. I assume that's the expiration date and not the date of manufacture. With that in mind, I can't help wondering if it's still worth shooting. The shop had it on a shelf, not refrigerated at all. I assume there's some leeway with the expiration dates, but a year sounds a bit much. Thanks for the pointers WRT the developing chemicals. I'll archive this email for use at a later date. -- Walt On 2/9/2011 12:55 AM, John Coyle wrote: Hi Walt - I used to use Plus-X extensively, and always developed it myself in Acutol or Microdol-X. Acutol gives very fine grain and high acutance (as the name implies) with lovely smooth tone gradation. Microdol-X is designed to give very sharp negatives, perhaps a little more grain and contrast than Acutol. I normally rated it at 200ASA, but it's worth testing a roll or two with your own gear to see what suits you best. To save film, you could expose half-dozen frames on a roll at 80, 125 and 200 ASA for each set , then develop the roll normally to see which works best. You can push Plus-X quite hard, but the quality begins to drop off at over 400ASA, I found. I never much liked 400CN, couldn't seem to get really black and white negs, always a little tinge of colour left. Haven't used UltraMax, so can't help you there! HTH John Coyle Brisbane, Australia -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walter Gilbert Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 2:23 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Advice solicitation for analog shooting So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound (didn't realize I had to press the button on the bottom plate), and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 3 rolls BW400CN 4 rolls UltraMax 400 What do I need to know from here? Thanks! Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Thanks, John! I did notice that difference just after I sent this message last night. I do believe the camera shop where I bought the film will develop it -- for how much, I don't know. It may be all for naught, though, considering the film appears to be a year out-of-date. I'll give it a shot and see, though. Thanks for the heads-up, nonetheless! Best, Walt On 2/9/2011 1:29 PM, John Sessoms wrote: From: Walter Gilbert So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound (didn't realize I had to press the button on the bottom plate), and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 3 rolls BW400CN 4 rolls UltraMax 400 What do I need to know from here? The Plus-X is a traditional BW film. The BW400CN UltraMax 400 are Process C-41 (color negative like from a one hour mini-lab). If you take the Plus-X to a mini-lab it will mess up the film. Same thing if you try to develop the other two using traditional BW chemistry. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3431 - Release Date: 02/08/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Feb 9, 2011, at 15:55, Walter Gilbert wrote: BTW -- I did note that the date stamp on the Plus-X box is 01/2010. I assume that's the expiration date and not the date of manufacture. With that in mind, I can't help wondering if it's still worth shooting. The shop had it on a shelf, not refrigerated at all. I assume there's some leeway with the expiration dates, but a year sounds a bit much. Not a lot of color-shift on Plus-X. I'll wager you'll be just fine. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: , and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. Walt. One trick i used in making sure the film had been grabbed by the teeth was to watch the the rewind knob. If it turned will i advanced the film lever, all was well. The other thing i did was after the film was loaded and i advance to the 0 mark, was to do a short rewind to pick up any slack in the film. Just needed to bring it back ever so lightly though. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 Never used it. 3 rolls BW400CN Used it some what. The local lab would process it and print out my 4x6 proofs on colour paper. Got some funky images that way. 4 rolls UltraMax 400 Again, never used it. Dave What do I need to know from here? Thanks! Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Good methods for dealing with roll film. Plus-X was my favorite Kodak film. But it should be shot at iso 80 or 100 and developed to spec. This will give it a little more punch. The tonality can otherwise be a bit boring. If you are printing yourself, print grade 3. That will add the contrast you need if you prefer to use a normal exposure. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -Original Message- From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 05:46 PM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: , and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. Walt. One trick i used in making sure the film had been grabbed by the teeth was to watch the the rewind knob. If it turned will i advanced the film lever, all was well. The other thing i did was after the film was loaded and i advance to the 0 mark, was to do a short rewind to pick up any slack in the film. Just needed to bring it back ever so lightly though. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 Never used it. 3 rolls BW400CN Used it some what. The local lab would process it and print out my 4x6 proofs on colour paper. Got some funky images that way. 4 rolls UltraMax 400 Again, never used it. Dave What do I need to know from here? Thanks! Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Collin Brendemuehl coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote: Good methods for dealing with roll film. Plus-X was my favorite Kodak film. But it should be shot at iso 80 or 100 and developed to spec. This will give it a little more punch. The tonality can otherwise be a bit boring. If you are printing yourself, print grade 3. What should those of us that made it to grade 7 do then Dave That will add the contrast you need if you prefer to use a normal exposure. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -Original Message- From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 05:46 PM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: , and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. Walt. One trick i used in making sure the film had been grabbed by the teeth was to watch the the rewind knob. If it turned will i advanced the film lever, all was well. The other thing i did was after the film was loaded and i advance to the 0 mark, was to do a short rewind to pick up any slack in the film. Just needed to bring it back ever so lightly though. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 Never used it. 3 rolls BW400CN Used it some what. The local lab would process it and print out my 4x6 proofs on colour paper. Got some funky images that way. 4 rolls UltraMax 400 Again, never used it. Dave What do I need to know from here? Thanks! Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
-Original Message- From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 05:51 PM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Collin Brendemuehl coll...@brendemuehl.net wrote: Good methods for dealing with roll film. Plus-X was my favorite Kodak film. But it should be shot at iso 80 or 100 and developed to spec. This will give it a little more punch. The tonality can otherwise be a bit boring. If you are printing yourself, print grade 3. What should those of us that made it to grade 7 do then If you've made it past the 6th grade then you should consider becoming a brain surgeon or a double-naught spy. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Good news. Thanks, Charles! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 4:39 PM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Feb 9, 2011, at 15:55, Walter Gilbert wrote: BTW -- I did note that the date stamp on the Plus-X box is 01/2010. I assume that's the expiration date and not the date of manufacture. With that in mind, I can't help wondering if it's still worth shooting. The shop had it on a shelf, not refrigerated at all. I assume there's some leeway with the expiration dates, but a year sounds a bit much. Not a lot of color-shift on Plus-X. I'll wager you'll be just fine. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Thanks for the tips, David! As for prints from the 400CN, I'll probably just have negatives made, then scan them at home. Any prints will come from the digital scans, which I assume will help produce less-funky results. I've looked around Flickr at scans made from UltraMax and, from what I can tell, it produces some nice photos with pretty saturated colors, which is what I like when shooting color -- particularly birds and butterflies. I'm curious to see how much luck I'll have catching birds in-flight on film. I suspect I'll get a lot of disastrous results, but the odd success will be awfully gratifying. Thanks again! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 4:46 PM, David J Brooks wrote: On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Walter Gilbertldott...@gmail.com wrote: , and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. Walt. One trick i used in making sure the film had been grabbed by the teeth was to watch the the rewind knob. If it turned will i advanced the film lever, all was well. The other thing i did was after the film was loaded and i advance to the 0 mark, was to do a short rewind to pick up any slack in the film. Just needed to bring it back ever so lightly though. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 Never used it. 3 rolls BW400CN Used it some what. The local lab would process it and print out my 4x6 proofs on colour paper. Got some funky images that way. 4 rolls UltraMax 400 Again, never used it. Dave What do I need to know from here? Thanks! Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Thanks for the exposure and print tips, Collin. I'll archive this email for future reference, too. I've got an ideal place to set up a dark room out in my shop if I ever get that seriously involved in film photography. It'll take some minor construction to keep light out control the temperature, but not a big project at all. Maybe by this fall I'll be ready to tackle it. -- Walt On 2/9/2011 4:49 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: Good methods for dealing with roll film. Plus-X was my favorite Kodak film. But it should be shot at iso 80 or 100 and developed to spec. This will give it a little more punch. The tonality can otherwise be a bit boring. If you are printing yourself, print grade 3. That will add the contrast you need if you prefer to use a normal exposure. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -Original Message- From: David J Brooks [mailto:pentko...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 05:46 PM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Walter Gilbertldott...@gmail.com wrote: , and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. Walt. One trick i used in making sure the film had been grabbed by the teeth was to watch the the rewind knob. If it turned will i advanced the film lever, all was well. The other thing i did was after the film was loaded and i advance to the 0 mark, was to do a short rewind to pick up any slack in the film. Just needed to bring it back ever so lightly though. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 Never used it. 3 rolls BW400CN Used it some what. The local lab would process it and print out my 4x6 proofs on colour paper. Got some funky images that way. 4 rolls UltraMax 400 Again, never used it. Dave What do I need to know from here? Thanks! Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard. On 2/9/2011 4:57 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: What should those of us that made it to grade 7 do then If you've made it past the 6th grade then you should consider becoming a brain surgeon or a double-naught spy. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard. I don't know that one. My reference was to Jethro Bodine. (For the youth among us, a character from the Beverly Hillbillies, c. 1965.) Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On 2011-02-09 19:15, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard. I don't know that one. My reference was to Jethro Bodine. (For the youth among us, a character from the Beverly Hillbillies, c. 1965.) The Happy Gizzard was the restaurant Granny opened, staffed with Jed, Jethro, and Ellie Mae. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Gotcha. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5aNn4Sfmas Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -Original Message- From: Doug Franklin [mailto:jehosep...@mindspring.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 07:19 PM To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting On 2011-02-09 19:15, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard. I don't know that one. My reference was to Jethro Bodine. (For the youth among us, a character from the Beverly Hillbillies, c. 1965.) The Happy Gizzard was the restaurant Granny opened, staffed with Jed, Jethro, and Ellie Mae. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
From: Walter Gilbert I just happened to notice last night, after I sent this message, that the Plus-X wasn't C-41 process film. I think the shop where I bought it will process it, though. I still don't have a dark room or supplies -- nor a tank or dark bag -- to work with, so I'll have to have all my film processed for the time being. But, once I get to the point where I feel I can get enough good shots with film to justify the investment, I'll probably start doing my own development. BTW -- I did note that the date stamp on the Plus-X box is 01/2010. I assume that's the expiration date and not the date of manufacture. With that in mind, I can't help wondering if it's still worth shooting. The shop had it on a shelf, not refrigerated at all. I assume there's some leeway with the expiration dates, but a year sounds a bit much. Thanks for the pointers WRT the developing chemicals. I'll archive this email for use at a later date. I really like Plus-X as a people film in medium format. I'm pretty sure I've got a couple of rolls of 35mm as well. I keep out of date film in a Tupperware container in the fridge, unless it's something I know I'm not going to get to soon, then it goes into the freezer. If you're not going to shoot the Plus-X film soon, go ahead and put it in the refrigerator until you're ready. It comes out of the fridge a day or so before shooting. But a year out of date at room temperature shouldn't be a problem, although if I were going to shoot it I'd over-expose it slightly. To do that on the K1000 I'd set the ISO dial to 100 and let the meter guide me based on that ISO. I've learned when to over/under expose compared to the meter indication in the viewfinder. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3431 - Release Date: 02/08/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Thanks, John! I put all of my film in the freezer as soon as I got home, since I'm just not sure how often I'll use it. Whenever I get ready to use it, I'll pull it out and stick it in a zip lock bag with a little silica gel pouch overnight to keep any condensation from getting to it. The few shots I've taken so far, I've dead-centered the meter as closely as possible at 125 under pretty bright conditions (snowy). Hopefully they'll still look OK. -- Walt I really like Plus-X as a people film in medium format. I'm pretty sure I've got a couple of rolls of 35mm as well. I keep out of date film in a Tupperware container in the fridge, unless it's something I know I'm not going to get to soon, then it goes into the freezer. If you're not going to shoot the Plus-X film soon, go ahead and put it in the refrigerator until you're ready. It comes out of the fridge a day or so before shooting. But a year out of date at room temperature shouldn't be a problem, although if I were going to shoot it I'd over-expose it slightly. To do that on the K1000 I'd set the ISO dial to 100 and let the meter guide me based on that ISO. I've learned when to over/under expose compared to the meter indication in the viewfinder. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3431 - Release Date: 02/08/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
If the scene you're shooting is primarily snow covered, you should overexpose by about two stops. At a centered meter reading, you'll get gray snow. The alternative is to take your meter reading from a gray card. Paul On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:20 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks, John! I put all of my film in the freezer as soon as I got home, since I'm just not sure how often I'll use it. Whenever I get ready to use it, I'll pull it out and stick it in a zip lock bag with a little silica gel pouch overnight to keep any condensation from getting to it. The few shots I've taken so far, I've dead-centered the meter as closely as possible at 125 under pretty bright conditions (snowy). Hopefully they'll still look OK. -- Walt I really like Plus-X as a people film in medium format. I'm pretty sure I've got a couple of rolls of 35mm as well. I keep out of date film in a Tupperware container in the fridge, unless it's something I know I'm not going to get to soon, then it goes into the freezer. If you're not going to shoot the Plus-X film soon, go ahead and put it in the refrigerator until you're ready. It comes out of the fridge a day or so before shooting. But a year out of date at room temperature shouldn't be a problem, although if I were going to shoot it I'd over-expose it slightly. To do that on the K1000 I'd set the ISO dial to 100 and let the meter guide me based on that ISO. I've learned when to over/under expose compared to the meter indication in the viewfinder. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3431 - Release Date: 02/08/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Dammit! I knew I was forgetting something last time I left the camera shop! Been meaning to get one of those for a while. I've clearly got a lot to learn, and appreciate all the help everyone's giving me. Thanks, Paul. On 2/9/2011 8:34 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: If the scene you're shooting is primarily snow covered, you should overexpose by about two stops. At a centered meter reading, you'll get gray snow. The alternative is to take your meter reading from a gray card. Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
The few shots I've taken so far, I've dead-centered the meter as closely as possible at 125 under pretty bright conditions (snowy). Hopefully they'll still look OK. -- Walt No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 8:40 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
More for dark subjects, like a black dog. When you get to very low light situations, the rules completely change since you need to deal with reciprocity failure. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt Close. Not low light, but a dark or black subject. If you shoot a picture of a black laptop computer or black camera body up close, then underexposure is called for. Works the same on film and digital. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. No. It's not amount the amount of light. The reason you overexpose snow or anything else that fills your frame with white is simply because it's white and very reflective. Like Collin said, the meter assumes everything is 18% gray and reflects the amount of light that an 18% gray surface would reflect. So shooting a white subject in low light, you would still overexpose. Shooting something totally black, you would want to underexpose by about one stop, since black doesn't reflect much light.. Again, using the gray card and exposing to the meter reading is usually better in really tricky lighting situations. Another alternative is an incident meter, which measures the light source rather than the scene. As with the gray card, you don't have to correct for the reflectivity of the subject when shooting with an incident meter. Paul Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 8:40 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. No. It's not amount the amount of light. The reason you overexpose snow or anything else that fills your frame with white is simply because it's white and very reflective. Like Collin said, the meter assumes everything is 18% gray and reflects the amount of light that an 18% gray surface would reflect. So shooting a white subject in low light, you would still overexpose. Shooting something totally black, you would want to underexpose by about one stop, since black doesn't reflect much light.. Again, using the gray card and exposing to the meter reading is usually better in really tricky lighting situations. Another alternative is an incident meter, which measures the light source rather than the scene. As with the gray card, you don't have to correct for the reflectivity of the subject when shooting with an incident meter. Paul ARRGH! That should have read It's not about the amount of light Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 8:40 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
From: Collin Brendemuehl Or a fry-cook at The Happy Gizzard. I don't know that one. My reference was to Jethro Bodine. (For the youth among us, a character from the Beverly Hillbillies, c. 1965.) For a really obscure Beverly Hillbillies reference ... Donna Douglas appears as the unmasked Janet Tyler in the Twilight Zone episode The Eye of the Beholder. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3431 - Release Date: 02/08/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Thanks, David/Collin/Paul. I think I understand, now. I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the subject isn't the snow itself. But, as I understand you all now, as long as there's a dark enough counterpoint to the snow within the frame, the metering will average out. My question in that case is, does the ratio of dark to light matter? Say, if you have a snowy field and a small black dog in that field, taking a photo of a distant grey object, is that enough to get the correct averaging? Or do I need to compensate for the dominance of the snowy field within the frame? In other words, does the meter average the difference between the darkest and the brightest objects in the frame, or the total amount of darkness and brightness in the frame? Thanks again, y'all. I do appreciate your patience. -- Walt On 2/9/2011 9:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. No. It's not amount the amount of light. The reason you overexpose snow or anything else that fills your frame with white is simply because it's white and very reflective. Like Collin said, the meter assumes everything is 18% gray and reflects the amount of light that an 18% gray surface would reflect. So shooting a white subject in low light, you would still overexpose. Shooting something totally black, you would want to underexpose by about one stop, since black doesn't reflect much light.. Again, using the gray card and exposing to the meter reading is usually better in really tricky lighting situations. Another alternative is an incident meter, which measures the light source rather than the scene. As with the gray card, you don't have to correct for the reflectivity of the subject when shooting with an incident meter. Paul Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 8:40 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Most older SLR meters are center weighted, so something in the middle of the frame influences the meter reading more than on the edges. But generally speaking, you need a balance of dark and light to achieve the reflectivity of gray. The newest matrix meters compare what the camera sees to some preprogrammed situational data, and try to make a decision based on that. Generally, they don't require as much compensation for subjects that are not overly dominated by one extreme of reflectivity. For example, the meter in one of my old spotmatics requires about two stops of exposure compensation in a snow scene, but one stop is usually enough to get the K-5 in the ballpark. You have to work with your camera and learn how it reacts to different situations. Rules and guidelines are good, but there's no substitute for experience. Again when it comes to nailing exposures in difficult situations, the gray card or incident meter is the easy way out. Paul On Feb 9, 2011, at 11:19 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks, David/Collin/Paul. I think I understand, now. I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the subject isn't the snow itself. But, as I understand you all now, as long as there's a dark enough counterpoint to the snow within the frame, the metering will average out. My question in that case is, does the ratio of dark to light matter? Say, if you have a snowy field and a small black dog in that field, taking a photo of a distant grey object, is that enough to get the correct averaging? Or do I need to compensate for the dominance of the snowy field within the frame? In other words, does the meter average the difference between the darkest and the brightest objects in the frame, or the total amount of darkness and brightness in the frame? Thanks again, y'all. I do appreciate your patience. -- Walt On 2/9/2011 9:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. No. It's not amount the amount of light. The reason you overexpose snow or anything else that fills your frame with white is simply because it's white and very reflective. Like Collin said, the meter assumes everything is 18% gray and reflects the amount of light that an 18% gray surface would reflect. So shooting a white subject in low light, you would still overexpose. Shooting something totally black, you would want to underexpose by about one stop, since black doesn't reflect much light.. Again, using the gray card and exposing to the meter reading is usually better in really tricky lighting situations. Another alternative is an incident meter, which measures the light source rather than the scene. As with the gray card, you don't have to correct for the reflectivity of the subject when shooting with an incident meter. Paul Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 8:40 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Excellent. Thanks again for all the help everyone's offered. It's been the photography 101 class I never got to take. I'll just have to burn through some film and make notes as I go. I can already tell that the $40 I spent on that K1000 will probably be the best investment I'll ever make in photographic equipment. -- Walt On 2/9/2011 10:29 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: Most older SLR meters are center weighted, so something in the middle of the frame influences the meter reading more than on the edges. But generally speaking, you need a balance of dark and light to achieve the reflectivity of gray. The newest matrix meters compare what the camera sees to some preprogrammed situational data, and try to make a decision based on that. Generally, they don't require as much compensation for subjects that are not overly dominated by one extreme of reflectivity. For example, the meter in one of my old spotmatics requires about two stops of exposure compensation in a snow scene, but one stop is usually enough to get the K-5 in the ballpark. You have to work with your camera and learn how it reacts to different situations. Rules and guidelines are good, but there's no substitute for experience. Again when it comes to nailing exposures in difficult situations, the gray card or incident meter is the easy way out. Paul On Feb 9, 2011, at 11:19 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks, David/Collin/Paul. I think I understand, now. I was thinking that since the snow was so glaringly bright that it would throw the meter off irrespective of the actual subject -- assuming the subject isn't the snow itself. But, as I understand you all now, as long as there's a dark enough counterpoint to the snow within the frame, the metering will average out. My question in that case is, does the ratio of dark to light matter? Say, if you have a snowy field and a small black dog in that field, taking a photo of a distant grey object, is that enough to get the correct averaging? Or do I need to compensate for the dominance of the snowy field within the frame? In other words, does the meter average the difference between the darkest and the brightest objects in the frame, or the total amount of darkness and brightness in the frame? Thanks again, y'all. I do appreciate your patience. -- Walt On 2/9/2011 9:18 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote: Thanks for the explanation, Collin. When Paul said to overexpose, I was actually thinking it sounded counter-intuitive -- that you'd want to under-expose in a snowy situation. But, it makes sense now that you explained that the meter assumes a neutral grey. So, I'm assuming that in extra-low-light situations, I'd want to under-expose by a couple of stops in that case. No. It's not amount the amount of light. The reason you overexpose snow or anything else that fills your frame with white is simply because it's white and very reflective. Like Collin said, the meter assumes everything is 18% gray and reflects the amount of light that an 18% gray surface would reflect. So shooting a white subject in low light, you would still overexpose. Shooting something totally black, you would want to underexpose by about one stop, since black doesn't reflect much light.. Again, using the gray card and exposing to the meter reading is usually better in really tricky lighting situations. Another alternative is an incident meter, which measures the light source rather than the scene. As with the gray card, you don't have to correct for the reflectivity of the subject when shooting with an incident meter. Paul Glad I found this out before getting too deep into the roll! -- Walt On 2/9/2011 8:40 PM, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: No!!! Always overexpose snow by 2 stops. Why? Because an averaging meter expects a mid-gray tone. The result will be gray snow unless you open it up, either with the shutter, aperture, or both. You can also change to iso32. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Advice solicitation for analog shooting
Hi Walt - I used to use Plus-X extensively, and always developed it myself in Acutol or Microdol-X. Acutol gives very fine grain and high acutance (as the name implies) with lovely smooth tone gradation. Microdol-X is designed to give very sharp negatives, perhaps a little more grain and contrast than Acutol. I normally rated it at 200ASA, but it's worth testing a roll or two with your own gear to see what suits you best. To save film, you could expose half-dozen frames on a roll at 80, 125 and 200 ASA for each set , then develop the roll normally to see which works best. You can push Plus-X quite hard, but the quality begins to drop off at over 400ASA, I found. I never much liked 400CN, couldn't seem to get really black and white negs, always a little tinge of colour left. Haven't used UltraMax, so can't help you there! HTH John Coyle Brisbane, Australia -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walter Gilbert Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 2:23 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Advice solicitation for analog shooting So, I now have this K1000 and a decent array of lenses to use on it. Having finally figured out how to properly operate the camera after wasting one roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 due to the fact that I opened the back of the camera prematurely thinking I had it completely wound (didn't realize I had to press the button on the bottom plate), and nearly wasting a roll of Kodak Plus-X 125 by not properly affixing it to the advance mechanism (didn't securely set the notches onto the teeth), I think it's time I ask for a little guidance before I proceed any further. I have three different types of film and thought I'd ask the experienced film shooters if there's anything I can do to get better images out of them -- any quirks or characteristics I should be mindful of, or specific uses or conditions any of them particularly excel at. I have the following: 2 rolls Plus-X 125 3 rolls BW400CN 4 rolls UltraMax 400 What do I need to know from here? Thanks! Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
