Q: about (mis) metering and thin negs

[peter_kim2]

Im kinda embarassed to ask this cause I consider myself a pretty

advanced ameteur but...

 

Ive been taking a lot of pictures at night with tri-x and the negs

are coming out thin indicating underexposure.

 

My question is, if you set you camera to aperture priority or full

auto shouldnt the negs be exposed with good density? And expose

using a shorter shutter speed? So even if your pictures are blurred

cause of hand-held camera shake shouldnt they be well exposed even

under low light?

[michaelging]

There is no detail in negs where there is no light.I am not sure what you are taking photos of ,but you need some light to have shadow detail,even at night. Your meter might be fooled by bright lights in a scene.The meter might be underexposing due to their highlights. I would figure out what in a picture I wanted to be medium gray and then take a gray card reading with my meter.Some developers give better shadow detail ,I would try pushing my film if you are still not getting what you want.

[art_haykin]

Whether you shoot on full auto, aperture priority, shutter priority, or full manual, you MUST have a proper shutter speed combined with a suitable f/stop to get a well exposed neg. Some built-in meters simply can't handle low light level readings, and this is where knowledge and experience come in.The film doesn't know how you arrived at your settings, and it doesn't care; ALL that matters is that you select proper settings, and getting them is YOUR responsibility. STUDY YOUR FUNDAMENTALS, you SEEM to lack grasping them.

[link]

Peter,

 

You've discovered why they invented the spot meter and the manual camera!

 

If you have one bright neon sign in your shot, your camera may well underexpose the

rest of the shot. And, your camera meter may not be sensitive enough to meter at

night as well.

 

You can consider yourself a novice (exposure wise) until you learn to use a manual

camera and light meter. This is even if you generally take great photos in auto mode.

[peter_kim2]

Thanks BG I guess hot spots may have thrown off the cameras meter. Actually I have been pushing tri-x (underexposing it) by 1 or 2 stops depending on the occasion. This of course would lead to underexposed and thin negs but I thought developing them longer would compensate for the under exposure better than I have seen.

[link]

Peter,<p>

 

Pushing the film will increase the density of the most exposed areas. It will add little

or no density to the least exposed areas. So it is not the same as adding more light to

the film.<p>

 

I really love to take photos at night too. Using a tripod, I've gotten very good

exposures without pushing the film.<p>

 

Here's one I did on ISO 400 color negative film. If I had had an automatic camera here

the light bulb in the scene would have caused underexposure. I used a spot meter,

read the white door, and opened up two stops to keep the door white in the final

photo. I also used a tripod!<p>

 

<p align="center"><img src="http://fujirangefinder.com/files/0441/karate_.jpg"

border=2> <center><i>night scene using 400 speed film and tripod</i></center>

[photo_bob2]

Automatic settings on a camera were invented for those who don't know how to make a correct exposure. <br><br>Most meters have diffulty in low light situations. If you want to be any good at photography, you have to learn how to properly meter a scene yourself. That doesn't mean never use the AE modes, but know what they are doing, their limitations, when they are appropriate, and when they are not. <br><br>Also, in regards to thin negs, I'm sure you know about reciprocity failure. Meters know nothing about it. Good luck.

[peter_kim2]

I like youre shot BG. The exposure looks right on and the overhead light isnt noticably blown-out.

 

I think I may have not worded my original post very well. I DO know how to meter a scene and pick what to meter off of, and yes I have a meter which is why I have no problem when I have a tripod and am shooting static scenes at night (like buidlings and such). But I just find it impractical to carry in certain situations.

 

Specificlly I was talking about street photography at night. On the street or inside bars or houses etc. This is the type of place where I have to rely on the internal meter to get a quick shot. I suppose I'll just have to pay closer attention to how my meter is working and bemore concious of picking a middle tone to meter off of before I take the shot. But like I said, this is hard to do for quick reaction photography. I have a centerwieghted meter on my camera and I suppose I have to stop thinking like it is a spot meter.

[al_kaplan1]

When I'm shooting inside new places, whether homes or offices or bars, the first thing I do is wander around with an incident light meter and take a bunch of readings in different places. I might do this even if I have no real plans to take any photographs. Then it's easy enough to set the camera and make adjustments as required with no additional metering. Eventually you'll get to the point where You "just know" what the exposure should be. I suspect that this is not so much as an ability of the eye to measure brightness as for the brain to process a bunch of information based on the number of lamps, average size of bulbs used in homes, distance of lamps from subjects, color and brightness of walls, etc.

 

If the subject moves from 5 feet to 10 feet away from a lamp he's getting only 25% of the direct light. But reflected light, proximity to other lights, all come into play.

 

It's true that some developers will give a bit more effective film speed than others. When increasing development time you're limit is set by how much you can afford to lose highlight detail, because these quickly block up. The mid tones start looking too contrasty also. And the shadow areas? They're hardly affected at all, still underexposed. A two bath developer like Diafine will give you a fixed and consistant "push", with most photographers agreeing that 1200 works well with Tri-X. Anybody who tell you that you can force much more speed out of Tri-X with another developer is not getting well exposed negatives with anything like normal contrast!

[vinny_walsh]

How long are your exposures? Reciprocity failure could be an issue if they are a second or

longer.

[lex_jenkins]

If you push, effectively underexposing and overdeveloping film, there will always be compromises. You'll sacrifice shadow detail in exchange for beefed up midtones. Ideally we'll retain midtone separation and avoid blown highlights and excessive contrast.

 

So examine your negatives and your techniques carefully. Underexposed negatives that are not sufficiently offset by extended development in an effective speed enhancing developer will be thin. There are several good speed enhancing developers. I like Microphen and Diafine. Others report good results with DD-X, Acufine, Xtol, TMax and others.

 

OTOH, if you do see shadow detail but the negatives are thin, the problem is underdevelopment. Usually pretty simple process of elimination.