Not quite understanding manual exposure

[David Mitchell]

Interesting, David. I guess it's essential to use a tripod with slow film, unless you are doing deliberately out of focus, shakey stuff (not that I would ever do that )

Yeah the VR on those early lenses weren't that amazing lol

Check out this calculator, you might be able to get away with some ISO 100 @ f8 if its overcast:

Photographic Exposure Calculator for Available Light

Hmm I wonder if it would be an idea to look at adding a simple ND filter on the front to stop it down a bit, it would mean you can use normal films with the limited settings.

 

[David Mitchell]

Oh and if you stop the lens down enough with a small enough aperture and enough filters you could get this - a 34 month exposure time, this is of a building being knocked down and rebuilt:

 

[Rob MacKillop]

34 months!!! Wow! It looks amazing.

 

[David Mitchell]

34 months!!! Wow! It looks amazing.

Its the longest exposure ever done by Michael Wesely, I really like the images he takes - although they do take a while to make!

The Longest Photographic Exposures in History - The Latest - itchy i

 

[Pete Askew]

I was travelling yesterday and I missed most of this. It looks like you have most of the answers you need Rob.

You are quite right in that it is important that the light meter knows what film you have. Neither of the Mamiyas that you have take account of it and basically don't care. So if the incident light meter reading says that for 100 ISO (ASA) film you would use 1/60s at f1:8.0, those are the shutter speed / aperture combinations you would use to give you a 'correctly' exposed negative. If you wanted a shallower depth of field you might open the lens to f1:4.0 and increase the shutter speed to 1/125s. You have kept the relationship and are allowing the same amount of light to hit the film that has been indicated to produce a correct exposure at that level of sensitivity (ISO).

The Nettar has limitations though and was made when film emulsions were much slower: 12 - 100 ISO. Unless, as Beth says, you employ a neutral density filter (or two) you may have to limit yourself to films with a lower ISO in sunny conditions. If you can find one that fits you could buy a two stop ND filter and then, if you use 400 ISO film, tell the meter you are using 100 ISO film (or base your Sunny 16 calculation on that). It would give the same result. You can always take it off if the sun goes in or you go inside.

If you find yourself out with 400 ISO film and no ND and the sun comes out you could expose as if it were 100 ISO and then tell the people developing the film what you have done (providing you have done this with the whole film). They can compensate when they develop the film. This will work better with B&W than colour and should be a last resort. It works better the other way round though (again, and better with B&W than colour) and so it maybe better to go for the less sensitive film option and treat it as faster if the light dries up. You then get it push (as opposed to pull) processed by telling the lab that the 100 ISO film you were using was exposed as 400 ISO.

Hope that helps.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

It does help, so thank you for taking the time. I have a much clearer understanding now than just two days ago. I'll save the Pan F I've ordered, three rolls, for the Nettar.

 

[Pete Askew]

Sound like a good plan. Don't push Pan F more than one stop though as it doesn't respond that well to extended development. As long as it is sunny, that shouldn't be a problem though.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

This is Scotland. It's always sunny!

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Got a note back from the developer of my first two rolls through the C330 - some of the shots are overexposed, and with one film there is clouding at the edges due the film not being tight enough on the rollers. Apparently I didn't put it on carefully enough. Either that, or there is something wrong with the camera.

I'm going to put those rolls behind me. Today I went out at lunchtime and used one roll as a test, by using the Weston Master IV and the iPad app, FotometerPro, lightmeters for every shot, and took notes of all the readings. I also used an app called Expositor Lite, which is a digital version of the old slide-rule type meter based on weather attributions: sunny, cloudy, etc.

Interestingly, the Weston and the FotometerPro agreed on all readings, with just the occasional slight difference. This was encouraging. However, the Expositor Lite was all over the place, and I gave up on it eventually.

So, if this roll (Pan F 50) comes back reasonably well exposed, I'll know exactly what to do from now on. It has been a fast-moving cloudy day, with shade followed by bright sun, so I got a good opportunity to try different lighting conditions. I've too often relied on guesswork, sometimes getting it right, but equally sometimes getting it completely wrong. I'm determined not to waste any more time, money or exposures!

 

[Pete Askew]

The fogging on the edge of the film might have been you not wrapping it tightly enough (try to keep 120 film in the shade and then put it into a pocket or bag) or it might have been a light leak on the LH side where the spindles are (although it was on only one film). When I load 120 film I always keep a finger / thumb on the full part of the roll to keep some tension on it and ensure it is taut between the feed and take-up spools.

I assume that the shutter seems to firing OK and is not sticking - take the lens off and look through it while tripping the shutter. It should snap cleanly. The acid test will be how the Pan F comes out.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

It looks fine through the lens, and Ffordes checked it out and put new light seals. So I suspect it was my fault. I was very careful with the Pan F. Unfortunately it will take a week before I find out...

 

[David Mitchell]

When you get them scanned in you can always adjust the exposure a bit, I found that a few of my mates overexposed images I could pull back in post.

Will be cool to see what you got

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Cheers, David.