Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/01/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Subject: [Leica] under vs. over exposed peeps > > shot away three rolls of Neopan 1600 at 3200 ASA I thought. Only when > I > went out to get them processed this morning, I found that one of these rolls >> had actually been a Provia 100! <<<<<<, > >If I understand you correctly, you have underexposed the Provia by 5 > >stops (if you rated the film at 3200). This sounds pretty hopeless. I > >would stop by s-Color and ask what they think about a 3-stop push, but > >that would still only get you to 800 and cost you an arm and a leg... And Kyle said......... > that would have actually been OVER exposing four stops. so you want to >PULL process it. i think it's perfectly likely you have useable images there (my > definition of useable is different than most other peoples i think)<<<<< Kyle he shot two 1600 rolls at 3200... that's cool and they'll be OK. It's the roll of Provia 100 that he also rated at 3200 and that's screwed! It's underexposed by 5 stops!!!! The film has a rating of ASA 100. It was underexposed by 5 times at 3200!!! The chances of anything being there with any kind of super soup is unlikely, certainly anything useable. If it were a roll of ASA 3200 and exposed at 100 that would be "OVEREXPOSED by 5 stops!" And pulled process might, although unlikely, show something. But the highlights would be so blown out even with pulled processing it wouldn't produce a useable image, certainly nothing to match the other two rolls shot and souped properly. ted - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html