help

Discussion in 'Critique Forum Archives' started by fightheheathens, Dec 17, 2005.

  1. fightheheathens

    fightheheathens TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,011
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Berkeley
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    this might be more appropiate in the critique section, so mods please move it if you feel so.

    This question deals with film so no PS advise on how to fix it.

    I recently went to the UP ([SIZE=-1]Upper Peninsula of the state of michigan) which is connected to lower michigan by the mackinac (pronounced maciknaw) bridge which is the 3rd longest bridge in the world. anywho on the way back i shot a roll of film on the bridge, it was all lighted up pretty and the light from the city of mackinac was makeing cool shaddows on the low cloud cover.
    well alas i sent my roll of 26 shots in and got 19 back. Being new to night film photography (ive dont quite a bit of night with my digital point and shoot) and being that my light meter doesnt work after a shutter speed of 1/4th of a second i extensively bracked my shot. i did full stop increments from 1 second to 60 second exposures at f/8. the 1, 2, and 4 second shots didnt work, the negatives are completely blank so the lab saved me the trouble and didnt print them. however all the shots i got back were pretty bad, not compositionally, but as far as color and detail none of them really worked.
    I would like some help on solving the problem. obviously i dont want to waste entire rolls of film.

    so here are the specs and an example picture. (this one turned out the best)
    It was 10 degrees F / -12 degrees C which i shot these pictures using a tripod and a release cable. I used Fugi xtera 800 speed film (is this the problem?)
    settings were f/8 and i believe this was a 32 second exposure.
    this was done with a 80-200mm lens at 80mm.

    [​IMG]

    what im most disappointed with is the color in the bridge. look at the reds and the greens. there seems to be a halo or just a smudge here.

    also even in the under exposed pictures around 4-16 seconds, the colors of the bridge look the same (just splotches) while i get no detail in the actual bridge structure.

    is this crappy photography or someother effect be it the cold, the film or the paranormal?
    i only ask because all the images were like this, be it under, propper or over exposed.

    thanks for any help
    [/SIZE]
     
  2. crawdaddio

    crawdaddio TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,157
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Central IL
    I like the photo. Isn't 800 too high for night photography? Sorry, I'm not much help, am I?
     
  3. PlasticSpanner

    PlasticSpanner TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    51
    Location:
    Cheshire, England
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Looks like similar problems faces with astrophotgraphy to some extent. Humid air hangs over water & damp field and causes light to be diffracted similar to a heat haze. This may be what is upsetting the sharpness & colours on the bridge.

    Also your sensitive film has picked up the terrible light pollution in the clouds, ironically from the lights on the bridge & city behind it which you are trying to capture.

    I'd say use a slower film say 400iso max and double/half your exposures at one aperture then again at another. It'd also be worth watching the temperature & waiting until it's neither rising or falling between 1 hour intervals which also causes air currents & disturbances.

    As a thought & since the obvious should be the first to check, was there any dew at all on the front of your lens and did you let your camear climatise to the ambient temperature before taking the shots?
     
  4. fightheheathens

    fightheheathens TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,011
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Berkeley
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    unfortunatly 800 iso was all i could find in the UP...something about no one living up there.


    and now that you mention it i was ruff on the film, i really didnt give it time to climatize other then setting up the tripod and shot, and half way through the roll, i threw it in the warm car and drove to another shot. being that it was 10F and i only had one glove on, i wasnt all to hip to waiting around :lmao:

    the thought did cross my mind, but i didnt think it would be that big of a deal.

    thanks alot
     

Share This Page