what film under high contrast conditions?

[randall_pukalo]

Under mid day sun, with strong shadows and in a high contrast setting

such as on the border of a clearing in the woods with very bright and

dark patches, is it best to counter with a very low contrast print

film? Any film suggestions for this case?

I just got back some AGFA Ultra shot under these conditions, and it

was a disaster. Too bad, because the film was fantastic for my

previous shots of fall foliage. I also shot some Kodak UC 400 that

day, and it too was bad - blown highlights and black shadows, but not

to the extent of the Ultracolor. Would metering for the shadows and

using something like Reala be the strategy to use under these

conditions?

[scott_eaton]

If you're getting more contrast with UC 400 over Agfa Ultra you need a different lab and not a different film.

[r.t. dowling]

Kodak 160NC or Fuji Reala would be good in the situation you're describing.

[albert lui]

The midday sun's contrast (D>6) is difficult for film to capture, as you found out. Tiffen offers the Ultra Contrast filter as a solution. Since I have not tried it, I don't know if the Tiffen is effective.

[ccrevasse]

Fuji NPS or a similar reduced-contrast portrait film is probably your best bet. However, I'm not familiar with the contrast filter described above.

[jimdesu]

If you're a real weirdo like I am, in addition to print film, you could use the great yellow father's duplicating slide film (edupe) -- it's got a asa that varies from 6 to 24 and is tungsten-biased, but it's got a 9.5 stop LINEAR exposure range that scans great (at least w/ my imacon).

 

It's a pain in the rear to use, but you get high-contrast plus large exposure range.

[scott_eaton]

<I>Kodak 160NC or Fuji Reala would be good in the situation you're describing.</i><P>If his lab printing is so bad that he can't tell contrast from Agfa Ultra from UC 400, then he could use Kodak VPS and pull it three stops and not see a difference. UC 400 on a Frontier isn't even that bad.