I joined the Medium Format Club today.

[cgipson1]

Thanks for the explanation of why to shoot ISO 400 color film at 200 that makes sense. The only problem is I will be sending it off to be processed since I have no access to a dark room. Will they process it where I specify or where the film is marked if I shoot it at something marked differently from the film ?


Here is a quick shot of the gear....


View attachment 17268

Sweet! Yes.. most labs will gladly process as you request, sometimes at an extra charge though.

 

[Derrel]

There will be no need for any special processing on color neg that's been downrated to a lower EI. Enjoy! You got yourself a VERY nice set-up there!!!

 

[SamSpade1941]

There will be no need for any special processing on color neg that's been downrated to a lower EI. Enjoy! You got yourself a VERY nice set-up there!!!

Ok cool so I can shoot at 200 and just send it off and let them process like its been shot at 400 ?

 

[Derrel]

Yes. And I bet the prints that come back from a decent lab will look awesome too!

 

[Tuffythepug]

Many color negative films seem to "do better" when the film is down-rated to an E.I. (Exposure Index, not the same thing as ASA or ISO rating which is an "official" rating) that is at least one exposure value lower than the stated ISO value. Ensuring that the SHADOW values have a generous exposure is one of the main benefits of setting a personal "E.I." that is half, or less, than the ISO value on color negative films. Kodak's old VPS Color negative film was rated at ISO 160, and most of us shot that "down-rated" to E.I. 100 (in effect, yielding a 2/3 stop over-exposure on all shots.)

With color reversal films (AKA slide film), setting a lower-than-ISO E.I. is not usually a good idea, and in fact, many people who shoot 'chromes tend to deliberately UNDER-expose, by setting say 100 ISO film to an E.I.of 125 or even 160.

Just so I'm clear here. You are referring to color negative films only; I assume that B/W should be shot at the same ISO that the film is rated at ? Of course there would be times when you may want to over or under expose a particular shot or shots on a roll but that could be done on a per-shot basis with your exposure controls. Or am I still missing something ?

 

[SamSpade1941]

Yes. And I bet the prints that come back from a decent lab will look awesome too!

I will shoot a couple of rolls that way and send them off. I am so looking forward to this. Oh yeah ....

 

[Derrel]

Many color negative films seem to "do better" when the film is down-rated to an E.I. (Exposure Index, not the same thing as ASA or ISO rating which is an "official" rating) that is at least one exposure value lower than the stated ISO value. Ensuring that the SHADOW values have a generous exposure is one of the main benefits of setting a personal "E.I." that is half, or less, than the ISO value on color negative films. Kodak's old VPS Color negative film was rated at ISO 160, and most of us shot that "down-rated" to E.I. 100 (in effect, yielding a 2/3 stop over-exposure on all shots.)

With color reversal films (AKA slide film), setting a lower-than-ISO E.I. is not usually a good idea, and in fact, many people who shoot 'chromes tend to deliberately UNDER-expose, by setting say 100 ISO film to an E.I.of 125 or even 160.

Just so I'm clear here. You are referring to color negative films only; I assume that B/W should be shot at the same ISO that the film is rated at ? Of course there would be times when you may want to over or under expose a particular shot or shots on a roll but that could be done on a per-shot basis with your exposure controls. Or am I still missing something ?

Yes, I was referring SPECIFICALLY to "modern" color negative films, many of which respond quite well to a stop or so of deliberate over-exposure. As far as B&W films--NO, they are not always best exposed at their stated ISO values. Exposure Index in B&W takes into account a whole slew of factors, like metering method, subject tonal range, degree of development the scene will require, degree of contrast desired in the negatives, and so on. MANY times B&W shooters will "over-expose and under-develop", with a diluted, compensating type developer, having metered favoring shadow tones, using a "generous" EI rating of say shooting 400 film at EI 250 or EI 320 or even EI 200, and then developing the film to produce a rather "delicate" negative that has less contrast than one would get with "Standard" ISO and "Normal" film development.

IN B&W negative work,there is "Minus Development", Normal Development, and "Plus Development". With dedicated film magazines or backs, the MF worker can reserve one magazine for really contrasty scenes, with say a film down-rated 1.7 EV, and slated for MINUS devdelopment. He can also have a magazine rated for "PLUS" development, which might be shot on very low-contrast "FLAT" scenes that need to be punched up a bit. Plus one for his "Normally-rated"film, slated to be developed "normally".

 

[Fred Berg]

When I overexpose colour negative film the results come out good without having to tell the lab. DIN 27 exposed at DIN 24 and DIN 24 exposed at DIN 21 work very well. Derrel is right about chrome film - do not overexpose! Chrome or colour positive is also called colour reversal film, so the reversed method (underexpose positive where you overexpose negative film) is logical even if it seems odd to underexpose to increase saturation, etc.

 

[Tuffythepug]

Derrel, thank you for your insights and explanations. I have 2 rolls of color and 2 rolls of b/w I'll try your suggestions for exposure values.

SamSpade, That is a very nice system you've got there. I am anticipating seeing some great photos posted soon !

 

[PhotoWrangler]

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't those 220 backs pretty much useless these days. From what I know, aren't there only like one or two rolls of highly priced 220 rolls of film still being made? And you can't use 120 film in a 220 back because of the pressure plate differences correct?

 

[SamSpade1941]

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't those 220 backs pretty much useless these days. From what I know, aren't there only like one or two rolls of highly priced 220 rolls of film still being made? And you can't use 120 film in a 220 back because of the pressure plate differences correct?

It is still in production , it is not as common as 120 and thats fine the rolls I have I paid nothing for as they came with the camera. I will as funds permit goto APUG or eBay and find myself a couple of 120 film backs also. I got a really good deal on the camera though and I plan on using it. I cant afford a full frame digital and I traded some stuff I had owned for years for this camera outfit. Had I sold the stuff I traded it would not have financed a D200. Plus I have been been wanting a nice medium format.


I did a check on B&H and found 4 types of Kodak and ebay turned up tons of expired film. I know the stuff is on APUG all the time also.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

I knew there were at least one or two rolls of 220 left. I almost bought a minty but cheap A24 back for my Hassy, until I realized that those few rolls of 220 were so expensive.

 

[SamSpade1941]

I shot a few frames today I am going to loves this camera. I will admit to burning a few frames today because there are times when I leave my D40 in auto mode especially if I am walking around and I see something and I want to capture it very fast then I just get the camera up to eye level press the shutter button so it focuses and then gets the exposure. I got in a hurry a couple of times with the Bronica wanting to take a photo and would get the exposure information on my handheld light meter and then I would neglect to set it on the camera. d'Oh! so I imagine I wasted two or three frames of precious film but it was a learning experience and I will not do it again. I am so loving this camera I cant wait to get a couple of rolls shot so I can mail them off. I just don't want to waste any more film.

 

[formerpro]

Nice catch! I love my ETRS cameras. Wouldn't trade them for anything. Check out KEH for accessories. Which prism is that ? I can't make it out.

 

[SamSpade1941]

Its not the metered one, although I would like to have one, they are rather pricey. I have a decent light meter and I have a light meter app also on my iphone which works amazingly well.