Tungsten correction of daylight film: pre- or post-shutter?

I�m involved in a project in which I�ll be shooting several

tungsten-lit church interiors (I don�t have permission to light them

myself) on MF print film (view camera with rollfilm backs). All of the

images will be scanned and then color-corrected in Photoshop before

publication and printing. Since negative film isn�t available in

tungsten (though I guess this question would also be relevant if I was

using daylight transparency film), am I better off shooting unfiltered

and saving ALL of the tungsten correction for the Photoshop stage, or

should I filter at the scene to try to get somewhat closer to the

desired color balance before taking the picture (leaving final color

tweaking for post-scanning)? Any filter-number recommendations for

general tungsten use? Should I err on the less-filtered side (even

though some churches are quite warmly-lit) or just go with a pretty

strong filter, knowing that if I overshoot toward the blue, Photoshop

can bring it back to normal? (I won't be the guy doing the Photoshop

work.) Thanks in advance.

Simon, I would be on the page of getting either the negative or the transparency as close to the final required output as possible, and thereby minimising the amount of involvement with Photoshop et alia. Have you tried Fuji NPL160, which is a tungsten balanced colour negative film available in 120 and 4x5? Its datasheet is accessible from this link ;

 

http://home.fujifilm.com/products/datasheet/index.html

Thanks for the tip; I will try NPL 160. No, I didn't know about it

(the only color print film I usually shoot is consumer-grade fast

stuff of family and friends) -- is NPL well-respected in terms of

grain, sharpness, etc., compared to daylight-balanced print films?

(Sorry if that's a naive question; I just don't follow the print film

market very closely, but for this job the project directors are

insisting on print film "for its latitude.")

<p>I would suggest using colour-correction filters when you take the picture. If you don't, the red portions of the picture will be over exposed and the blue areas under exposed. You don't want to rely on Photoshop to add information that is not in the negative.</p>

<p>I would make two more suggestions. First, go to at least one of the churches and try making some test exposures. Second, take along some slide film (e.g., E100S). The slide film serves two purposes. First, it will tell you immedately whether your filtering is correct. Second, it serves as a reference for the person operating Photoshop so that s/he knows what the image <em>should</em> look like. Hopefully, the Photoshop operator understands the relationship between what appears on the screen and how the prints will look.</p>

Tungsten color negative film is also available from Kodak. Portra 100T. You can find more info on http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/portra100t/portra100T.shtml.

 

Andy

Thanks, David, Michael, and Andy for your good advice. Very helpful!

Be aware that the churches may not all be lit with true tungsten lights. There are a variety of light sources (mercury vapour, low pressure sodium to name two) that are being used indoors because they give more light per buck of electricity. Tungsten film may not colour correct for these sources.