[Leica] re: Exposure and Development

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

On 3/3/07 11:34 AM, "Robert Meier" <robertmeier@usjet.net> typed:

> Mark,
> 
> Your experiences are very interesting and, I think, back up the idea of
> exposing for the shadows, for that is just what you describe with your use
> of a lower ISO rating for Plus-X.   You didn't extend development time; no,
> you gave it more exposure to get more separation in the shadows.   You did
> the same thing for Delta 3200, much more drastically, but you don't say if
> that was to get more detail in the shadows.   That has been most people's
> experience with Delta 3200, that it is actually a 1000 speed film, or
> thereabouts.  What you said about Panatomic-X was particularly interesting,
> because when Kodak removed the so-called safety factor on B&W films in the
> early sixties, they doubled the ratings of most films, but not Panatomic-X,
> which they increased only to 32 from its original 25.   Your experience
> indicates that they should have doubled that too, that 50 was the right
> speed for it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robert
> 
> 
>> 


Robert I know that?s the way film works
exposure controls shadows.
So if roll after roll comes out thin in the shadows I adjust exposure
through an ASA tweak.
Not development which would control highlights or contrast.
But that's just how I adjust my film speed ISO ASA if needed its not how I
work shot by shot.

But when I'm out shooting I'm normally exposing for the shoulder of the
curve or below. Zones VI or VII. I'm fairly carefully placing my high tones
though exposure. Half the time its a face if its a fair skinned person.
That's zone VI.
If it seems like there would be a contrast problem I also then check the
shadows to see where they're going to in effect fall. If they fall way low
like I'm not going to get them then I rethink the picture. Recompose. Do I
really need that low detail? Does it even have to be in the picture?
Normally in a shot if something going to go it will be the shadows.
I'm not going to over expose highlights. That fry's a picture. You then
don't have an even remotely viable image.

But as I said thin shadows is most often not a such big deal in a highly
detailed full scale full substance full sized print.

Mark Rabiner
8A/109s
New York, NY

markrabiner.com