Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric Welch wrote: ><Snip> > > While shooting a photo essay on illegal drugs effect on Northwest > Missouri, I once accidentally shot P3200 at 400. It was in a classroom > with a teacher and some students and outside was bright sun on snow. It > was an important picture and I realized what happened before I > developed it. So I scratched my head for about an hour and figured out > a processing time I thought might work. > > It was unbelievable! Not only did the teacher and students come out > perfect, but you could see every detail outside as well. And the grain > was phenomenal. I guess I should tell John Sexton about my "discovery." This is called "pulling" and from working with TMZ (P3200) I can see how it would work with this film which is amazingly easy to print with an H&D curve straight as an arrow would be my guess. But with most films this could simply be looked at as "overexposing" and under developing. Making for results with negs which are a bitch to print as the overexposure has thrown the highlights to the shoulder of the curve where it is starting to flatten out. And is even more crushed by the lack of development. Dull Dead highlights with no sparkle, no shine. People who shoot Tri x at 200 for instance are very self righteous and smug about it. I think they feel one most deprive oneself to do the right thing and if you have the audacity to think you can go with the number on the box you are doomed to mediocrity for your photographic life. We must suffer to obtain the shadow detail George Eastman meant us to have. "NO you Can't shoot Tri X indoors because you MUST expose it at 200!" But I'd rather see people push than pull most films any day. And pushing in general I'm not much on I'm into using faster films for faster speeds. But pushing in general separates tones in the neg and this can be not too hard to print if your highlights didn't become bulletproof. But with some films, most I think, under developing and over exposing (pulling) makes for negs in which the tones can not be pulled apart onto the print. And are harder to print than pushed negs and always look dull no matter what you do with them. Even #5 contrast in straight Dektol for 5 minutes with the safelights turned off! So folks my opinion is when you see that huge Mega Chart thing they have on the internet and they list all those hundreds of wonderfull speed options for each and every obscure film that ever existed in the universe with it's corresponding developing time I recommend not thinking of these as creative options one can use for the appropriate situation or feeling. "I know! Today I'll shoot Tri X at 100 and tomorrow I'll shoot Plus x at 400! That's confuse the hell out of 'em!" (his custom printer I guess) Look at them as several hundred ways to go astray. As Spike Less says to: "DO THE WRONG THING!" Because a film really has a best and pretty much only appropriate ASA that it can be shot with a certain developer and dilution. To expose more is to overexpose and to develop less won't make things honky-dory. (Pulling) To expose less is to underexpose and more development won't in most cases ameliorate the situation at hand. (Pushing) Nine out of ten times the number on the box IS that magic number. If you figure out your developing time for this ASA IZO DIN setting you'll normally be at the best place to start. Maybe bracket a few and see if you can still get the shadow detail you know you need with a half stop less exposure. Sorry too much hot air! Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabinergroup.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html