[Leica] Don't push that film ...

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

> 
> So I had to test it out first, of course. Wide open, of course. Not much
> sense of using it any other way. I can only use it on one of the F3's
> with stop down metering. If I use it wide-open, I don't have to stop
> down :-)
> 
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/album08/05v18_0015
> 
> And 35 years from now, she'll probably look like this:
> 
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/album08/05v18_0014
> 
> So if anyone out there is debating between a Summilux or a Summicron. Go
> for the Summilux. I know, I know ... Noctilux too. But if you're
> debating that, you can probably afford both anyway.
> 
> Actually, this was just a catharsis ritual. I bought a cheap wide-angle
> zoom for my digital camera (18-70). Crazy how much value they can pack
> into such cheap pacages. The 24-85 has become part of a dedicated p&s
> package.
> 
> Daniel
> 
> 
>  
So you are underexposing these shots a stop?
I'm real fond of both of them especially the first one.
An interesting example of subject matter just about all the zone VI range.
The range of zone VI to zone VI! :)
Not often found in nature but sometimes in Sweden.
No shadows. Only a thin line way off in the Bokeh background of a picture
frame.
Blonds with light blue eyes in high key kitchens.
Pick your f stop.
You could "under expose" or "push" two stops as these image have no shadows
in them. So shadow detailed is not going to be lost.
You'd still get a viable image probably.

Sometimes a dirty blond can look like a brunette in under exposure.
especially if its a strawberry dirty blond.
But these are zone VII blonds perhaps.
A very narrow high key tonal range.

Would look great if you'd not developed more printed on the old Agfa Brovira
number 6 paper had you under exposed a bunch.

For negs in which you look upon with dis - stain.

Was the lens the 1.2 Nikkor? Or 1.4?


Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/