need help with ISO settings and film ISO?

<p>Hello, I am just wondering, I would like to take indoor, low light shots. I was going to take some yesterday but realized I may have not had enough available light and not sure how to set the camera. I brought 400 ISO film, opened up my aperture to it's fullest, 1.8 and it was still pretty dark to take pics. I would like not to use a flash nor do I want grainy pictures. Is this possible? Can I put 400 speed film in my camera and then set the camera ISO to 800 or 1000? What would that do? Under or overexpose? I have an F100 film camera and a Nikon 50mm 1.8 fixed lens. I just don't want any or very very little grain. How do people get such sharp indoor shots? Thank you! Confused!</p>

<p>If you set your camera ISO to a value higher than the true rating of the film, the shots will be under-exposed. How that affects the final images will depend on which film you use and how it's processed.</p>

<p>Faster films (higher ISO rating) have more grain than slower films. Or perhaps I should say that slower films have less grain than faster films, which is why people shoot the slower ones in the first place.</p>

<p>Fast film with no grain is the holy grail of photography. It doesn't exist, and in this digital world with no R&D money being spent on film, it's not likely to be invented.</p>

<p>The choice of developer will influence the grain of the film, but only within a narrow range.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

<p> </p>

<p>1. Switch to digital. Digital has "less grain" sorta speak</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Can I put 400 speed film in my camera and then set the camera ISO to 800 or 1000? What would that do? Under or overexpose?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You would be "pushing" or underexpose it. You would have to compensate when developing. It'a good way to get grain...On the other hand, 1600 speed film, if expose right, shouldn't be too grainy if you don't print big. If you underexpose bad, even ISO 100 could be grainy...</p>

 

<p>Digital sensors, as Leslie says, tend to be much less noisy/grainy at higher ISO settings than film. You might be able to smooth some grain out in digital post-processing of a scanned film, although the trick is to do this without losing detail.<br />

<br />

You could get less grain (relative to the final image size) at the same relative aperture if you use a longer lens on a larger film format (e.g. 645). Whether you'll find an f/1.8 lens for medium format is another matter, and you'd end up with correspondingly less depth of field.<br />

<br />

With the film and camera you've got, flash (which you don't have to shine straight at the subject, if you're worried about the look) or a long exposure on a tripod are your main options. If ISO 400 film is enough, Ilford XP2 is very low grain (because it's not a conventional black and white film) and might be worth a try, but you're stuck with conventional technology at ISO 800 and up. My limited experience is that fast colour film looks horrible, and you're better off sticking to monochrome in low light - but that's personal opinion. Good luck.</p>

<p>Ya, guess I would have to use flash and not even sure how to properly expose film when using flash. I heard 1/60 shutter is good but on my 200 speed film it was like totally grainy. I think I must have underexposed for sure. I wish there was fast film with no grain. I thought maybe a 1.8 ap was enough. I think one kinda has to guess when using flash if it's not a digital? Ya, time to save up for a digital I guess. I thought I was prepared enough for this important shoot but realized I wasn't and had to cancel. Total bummer! <br>

I guess if I used a powerful enough flash it may have turned out? But I have a really cheapo flash, does it matter if I have a cheapo one? Speedlight is just crazy expensive, is it worth the price?<br>

Thanks guys!</p>

<p>Oh and the pics would have been of an indoor event with people..I just didn't want any blur as well. I wanted a faster shutter speed because of that. I have no idea how to adjust everything. Digital sounds much more convenient.</p>

<p>Hate to tell you Jodi, but you need to know the basics for either system. Unless you have a point and shoot and just do that, push the button and pray. Speedlights for DSLR's are crazy expensive too. :)</p>

<p>Start reading, the Learning Tab up top is a good place to start.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Jodi - it sounds as if you're jumping into something without learning the basics. I'd strongly recommend you get a good book on exposure and lighting to help you understand the capabilities and limitations of equipment; mostly so that you don't just buy equipment thinking it will solve your problem and be disappointed with the result. Don't assume that digital will do everything for you when film doesn't....the right answer requires a finer understanding of the basics. Those of us who have been around a while have taken a lot of time and effort to grasp the basics and nuances so that the potential for successful results, repeatedly, has increased. You can buy all the equipment in the world, but if you don't understand the basics, your chances of success are pretty limited. This isn't to discourage you, but rather to get you going on a path to success. BTW - success doesn't necessarily mean expensive. Most of my flash gear is 25-30 years old and was purchased used...but boy does it work well!</p>

<p>Thanks for your responses, any book you would recommend for exposure and lighting? Thanks!</p>

<p>I would recommend any such book that your public library has on its shelf. This is quite easy to read up on.</p>

<p>There are two advantages to digital in this situation ... you can normally see what the result of what you have just done and adjust the settings, and there are computer programmes which permit you to adjust what you have done. The bad news is that when you are pushing things in low light with subject movement you are going to have to live with grain in film and noise with digital. The 'Holy Grail' suggested above applies to film and digital alike, though digital with the right camera is more capable, ie some DSLR rather than any P&S/bridge cameras.</p>