Bracketing had no noticeable effect?

[Dweller]

Hello all

I recently got a used Canon AE-1 Program and am learning my way around this new hobby and this camera.

On my first roll it seemed some of the photos were darker than I was expecting so I tried bracketing on this roll to have some examples of what to expect.

I took a number of pictures (mostly in full sun) by taking on at the settings reccomended by the built in light meter and then would take one each one full stop below and above the reccomendation by adjusting the aperture.

Yesterday I got the pictures developed at a large retail stores "one hour photo" counter. My first roll I used 1 hour developing at a camera store and wanted to compare the output from a "cheaper" location.. saving $1 in the process hehe.

So I get the pictures back and have what look to be 3 almost identical pictures of the same scene.

The film I used this time was Fuji Superia 200 (wow! look at those colors hehe)

So my question is why didn't the bracketing have more noticeable effect? Was it the film? The full sunlight? The processing? My first thought was the machine the used to process it somehow auto-corrected the exposure in the development process.

The lens I used was a 50MM Canon FD 1:1.8 (how would you properly refer to this lens?) Sometimes using a doubler(?) brining it to 100MM and occasionally using a circular polarizing filter.

Thank you all for any input you can offer

 

[voodoocat]

How much did you bracket?

Print film wont show an effect if you bracket in half stops. A full stop wont show a whole lot either.

 

[Dweller]

I believe it would be considered "one full stop". But I am new.. so what do I know

For example if the aperture was set to 4 I would go right 2 "clicks" to 2.8 and then left 4 clicks to 5.6

When bracketing with print film should I be going to 1.8 and 8 in this example?

 

[Cuervo79]

Very interesting, this is going to take a little bit.
First of al did you use the bracketing feature and if yes what program did you use or did you do it manually, you can bracket eather using time or aperture. I would gather that there would be a couple of factors that I think would of taken into because of the little diference in bracketing. 1 would be that the clerks at the labs make the machine correct the prints so that would explain the little difference. 2 the ISO could make allot of diference being that 200 isn't as sensitive as a 400 iso (but I'm bafled on this cause the meter on your camera compensates for that reading the dx coding and metering properly). I personally ask for contact sheets because then you get just one exposure geting the differences on everything with no correction. well those are my two cents but I would love to read other opinions cause i'm not 100% on it

 

[Dweller]

I had it set to manual aperture and shutter speeds. I like this camera for that feature, totally manual, totally automatic (re: exposure) or half and half.

The contact sheet is a great idea. Do the "cheap" 1 hour places provide those or is it just the "real" camera stores that will do that?

 

[TheProf]

Look at your negs not the prints

 

[voodoocat]

Look at your negs not the prints

Exactly. The printers automatically adjust for under and over exposure.

 

[ksmattfish]

If you looked at the negs (contact sheet) you would see a difference, but in the prints it would probably take up to 2 stops to start really showing a difference. Print film has a lot of exposure latitude, which means that they can still make good prints from over and under exposed negs. Slide film has little exposure latitude; which means you would see big differences in a stop or even a half stop over or under exposure.

 

[markc]

Bracketing isn't as much help when dealing with photo labs as when you print yourself. Their mini-labs are set to give an average exposure on every print, and I've found that unless you know the person that's running the machine while your job goes through and they know just what you want, you will always get "average". This means that if you want to get a certain look by over exposing a portait, for example, the print won't come out the way you expected. This is why I went to digital printing with my own printer.

Pull out the negs and take a look at them. If they look like different exposure settings, then the lab printed them re-compensated. If they look all the same, then something went wrong while setting the camera. While adjusting the aperture, the shutter needed to stay the same speed.

[edit - oops, too slow]

 

[jack]

TheProf is on it. your negs are the 'real' article.
likely it may be a combination of all the factors you mentioned
first. the film has big latitude, youre working in saturated light,
the lab auto-tweak the positives. you could refer to your lens as
a 1.8/50 or a 50/1.8. how did the polariser factor in the bracketing.
did you bracket some with / some without ?

 

[ksmattfish]

When using print film I almost never bracket; about the only time I do is with long exposure, night shots. I'm more likely to take a second pic at the same exposure just to have an extra original neg. When I shoot slide film I always bracket. Of course I don't shoot a lot of slide film, so I'm not as confident.

 

[Big Mike]

At first thought, I thought maybe you left the camera in AV mode...in which case, simply changing the aperture would have no effect on actual exposure. But...it seems that you had it in manual, in which case, you know what you're doing.

As mentioned, look at the negs.

 

[terri]

This is interesting; you should have noticed a difference when bracketing by a full stop each way.

My best guess would be what was mentioned above: the machines in these 1 hour places make auto adjustments and could have easily negated your bracketing effort. Always ask for a contact sheet from these places - they'll charge you for it, but to answer your question they SHOULD print one for you. And, like the Prof just mentioned, your negatives will tell the real story better than machine prints will. If you're really interested in testing your images like this, and you seem to be, you owe it to yourself to go to a better lab.

I seem to always bracket from shutter speed, btw. I guess I usually want whatever DOF I've chosen so don't want to alter my aperture.

Finally, are you sure you're studying your prints in a really good light? Try looking at them in daylight. There may indeed be some minor difference that you aren't noticing if you're looking at them at, for example, the kitchen table. This is not to disparage you in any way, just that you've stated you're new and sometimes a slight difference isn't as obvious under indoor lighting.

 

[Dweller]

Thank you everyone for the replies

I have alo tof info to work with now. Somewhere around here I have a light table and will pull that out and give the negatives a good close look to see what I can find there.

In hindsight, bracketing via shutter speed does seem to be the better choice. I am still learning about the effects of DOF changes with this camera as well so by bracketing using the aperature I was killing 2 birds with one stone so to speak hehe.

I will also try looking at the prints in daylight.. but living in Oregon that can be a tall order

Again, thanks everyone You have given me a lot of new info.

Now, off to shoot my first roll of B&W ever.. wish me luck

 

[ksmattfish]

My best guess would be what was mentioned above: the machines in these 1 hour places make auto adjustments and could have easily negated your bracketing effort.

Even at a pro lab the assumption is going to be that you want your prints as close to "normal" as possible. Unless you tell them to print your pics without adjustment, the printer is going to try to print them like he/she thinks they look good.

Where did you have your previous pics developed/printed? Unless they are very under exposed you should be able to get them reprinted a little lighter. Take in an example for them to gauge your request by.