[Leica] Exposure and Development

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

On 3/1/07 11:23 PM, "Robert Meier" <robertmeier@usjet.net> typed:

> 
> I certainly concede that it's possible to place the highlights where you
> want them through reducing exposure to tame very bright highlights.    It's
> just not a very good idea, because reducing exposure for the highlights
> also, of course, reduces it for the midtones and shadows, and you will get 
> a
> negative that is too thin and has no detail in the shadows.   I'm sure
> you're right that it's done all the time by a heck of a lot of people, but
> that, surely, is not the criterion for this, or just about anything else.
> 
>

The criterion would be less the people doing it I suppose but what their
shots come out like. Their prints.

I think a lot of people are "Right!! expose for the shadows and develop for
the highlights" and then go ahead and aim it at a face open up one and go
"click".
Do they aim it at the guys black corduroy pants and stop down two? I doubt
it and have yet to meet one, Who gives a hoot about the guys black corduroy
pants?

If we have two rolls to shoot in two bodies or two backs ISO 100 for both
one with transparency film one with neg film do we not use the same exposure
for both films? Do we not bleed?
I have and do. The negs come out perfectly just like the slides.
I may have tried to rethink they way I'd expose the neg after getting the
slide shot but after the 4th or 5th shot switching back and forth my brain
got tired and I just went with the same f stop. Every shot comes out I
promise. Amazing!

By the way digital for sure is an expose for the highlight ballgame.

As are 5th dimensional holograms.
Also how you do smellorama.

Its the workflo of the future.

Mark Rabiner
8A/109s
New York, NY

markrabiner.com