Classic Cameras and Slide Film

[frank r]

I have never shot slide film before; I have heard it is pretty unforgiving when

it comes to exposures.

 

I would like to experiment with it on some older cameras, including some

folders, which usually have less than reliable shutter speeds. I have a camera

repair facility that will test my shutters and give me a written slip that

shows the tested shutter speeds. I plan on having the slides scanned and

adjusting them in PS2.

 

My questions:

 

Is it better to err on the side of overexposing or underexposing slide film

while taking the picture?

 

Is this a practical plan? Meaning, will I be able to compensate in PS2 for any

slight differences in exposure?

 

Does anyone out there do it this way?

[jeff bishop]

Slide film is very unforgiving.

 

If you have to risk it, go under exposed rather than over. You will easily see the difference of 1/3 stop adjustments with slide film.

[ben conover]

Hi Frank, I did it with a Fuji 69 rangefinder, Fuji slide film, and Sue at the beach. The result was overexposed but I am glad I have the slide. Next I used the same film with Stefi in the woods, better results. I'd underexpose if anything, try to use a meter or give a better guess than I did. As you can see, nobody's perfect! Photoshop will NEVER change the original exposure. It helps to stick with one type and speed of film until you learn it's characteristics and learn how it looks in different light. DOn't worry about your camera, as long as you know what actual shutter speeds you are using you'll be fine. I rectly used a maiya 6 folding rangefinder which was very nice excpet for the finder being dim. Your question has inspired me to shoot some slide film again!

 

Cheers.<div></div>

[ben conover]

Stefi, guessed the light with Fuji slide film.<div></div>

[ben conover]

This one has better focus, guessed the light.

 

You can usually get one good frame out of three if you bracket exposures, ie, shoot at different shutter speeds or apertures.

[rogerp]

Slight underexposure (half a stop) will give you brighter more saturated slides. Overexposure is difficult if not impossible to correct later as the highlights will be blown and thereﾒs nothing that can rescue information that isnﾒt there. I scan my slides with an Epson flatbed and use Photoshop CS2 to get the best from them. It works fine as this way it is even possible to drag a reasonable image from transparency which wouldn't have projected very well.

 

Roger

 

 

Roger

[pico_digoliardi]

Bracket!

 

A colleague of mine shoots nothing but reversal (slide) film and he can see 1/4 stop differences.

 

FWIW, I tried like the devil to get acceptable results with a pristine Super Ikonta 6x9, but the lens just isn't good enough. It's probably due to the front-element focus design.

[ben conover]

Pico, the Mamiya 6 folder moves the film plane and not the lens, a better idea for fixed lens folders.

[dan_fromm2]

Ben, one well-exposed shot in three is terrible. Just terrible.

 

I shoot 2x3 Graphics, a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed and a Century. I usually meter incident, using a Gossen LunaPro (= LunaSix III) with Bogen adapter for SR-44 cells or a Weston Master V with Invercone. When I meter reflected I usually use the LunaPro, sometimes with its narrow angle adapter. I don't use lenses in shutter with known bad shutters on the Century; if I must use one of them, it goes on the Speed and I use its focal plane shutter, which is bang on. Rarely get a bad exposure. I send suspect shutters out for overhaul; I now have a small Compound and a Flash Supermatic waiting for me to pack and mail them.

 

Frank, if you must go wrong, as others have said slight underexposure is preferable to slight overexposure. Note, though, that some people recommend rating RVP-50 at EI 32, i.e., overexposing it 2/3 stops to reduce saturation. It is best to expose reversal film as accurately as possible.

 

One caution about using measured shutter speeds. Leaf shutters are slow to open, slow to close; with them, effective shutter open time is usually shorter than the time from "start to open" to "finish closing." That is, effective speed is usually faster than measured. Measured shutter speeds are a starting point for testing.

 

Good luck, have fun,

 

Dan

[vivek iyer]

Over exposed due to the subject and/or the photographer?!

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

If shutters change their speed over time then they will get slower. So you should expose spot on or underexpose a bit. I am using slide film on many old cameras and folders. On some I tested the shutter speed (and adjusted them if possible), on some I didn't. There is not much difference in the results. Just an old Ikonta 6x4.5 was somewhat disappointing since the 1/100 setting was far off.

 

German Prontor shutters tend to gum heavily over time but this refers to the slow speeds (1/15 or 1/10 and slower) in most cases. I found rim-set Compur shutters to be very reliable speeed-wise. I have a camera with Compur shutter which could be used as a standard for shutter testers. 1 sec was 1020 milli-sec - better than the accuracy of many testers.

 

The bottom line is: it is worth a try using slide film with old cameras. Even uncoated lenses (if they don't have more than 3 or 4 elements) will yield satisfying results in many cases.

[john falkenstine]

In the fifties, my Dad took many Kodachrome images with his Koak Retina. he used a General Electric Lightmeter. I have the slides, the camera still exists, and the Light meter STILL works. The slides are excellent. I would have the shutter checked out and NOT do any over-underexposing at all.

[rogerp]

Here a shot I took a while back on reversal film with a 6x9 prewar Voigtlander folder.

 

Roger<div></div>

[rogerp]

And here is a detail from the above image.<div></div>

[mfophotos]

If you use the sunny-16 rules with slide film, and your shutter speeds are good, then there should not be any problems. I have used Argus C3s, C-4s, various toy cameras (Diana & Holga), Contessa, Ciroflex, Rolleiflex, etc. with transparency films. My daughter has rotuinely used a hasselblad and sunny-16 and gets consistently excellent exposures. So long as you "guess" the light right, it's not a problem. However, older cameras can have slow shutters, so what you thought was 1/100, might be 1/50. You need to find that aspect out through some test shots.

[ben conover]

Nice photo of the Cutty Sark, my favourite London boat.

Dan, 1 in 3 correctly exposed photos would indeed be a very poor average, but I posted the photos as examples of poor exposure and exposing when the light is very hard to manage. Having not used a lightmeter much I reckon my guess is a pretty good one, but I enjoyed reading your metering methods.

[bueh]

You will waste film and money if you use (slide) film without proper exposure metering. Period.

 

I use often color slide film in my classics, just like you, to get an idea how well they are adjusted and how good I am at interpreting my light meter results. Yes, a hand-held incident meter will make shooting much easier for you and will give you more and better keepers. Of course, after some time you will get experience in guesstimating exposure, but you need a reference for learning, and a modern meter is much better than 19th-century Sunny-16.

 

Despite what the others said, I like my slides rather over- than underexposed. If you can afford it, shoot Fujichrome Astia 100F, as this slide film is very forgiving and even +1 stop overposure isn't very noticeable.

 

Especially for digital post-processing you will need perfectly exposed pictures to get the best results and have the most options. If a digital image is your final goal, better use a digicam instead of hassling with classic cameras, slide film and scanning.

[david_m]

Years ago, I took tons of Kodachrome slides using a Halina Paulette with an uncoupled selenium meter. I'd say about 75% came perfectly exposed and the rest varied from acceptable to unacceptable. Most problems come when you shoot a backlit subject and the meter tends to underexpose. By the way, those 35 year old Kodachromes still look perfect.

[dan flanders]

"You will waste film and money if you use (slide) film without proper exposure metering. Period." <p> This is a canard that needs to be put to rest. Millions of acceptable color slides were made with the old slow Kodachrome using either the Sunny Sixteen or the info supplied with the yellow boxes. Obviously using slide film requires more care than B&W but it ain't rocket science! What do you think was used before exposure meters became common and inexxpensive in the early sixties? If you had to hock the family treasure to buy an Argus brick there was rarely anything left over to buy a meter that cost almost as much as the camera! Some sprung for a cheap extinction meter but most of us just did without until we became affluent enough to obtain a Westo or Gossen. It was the proliferation of inexpensive Japanese made meters that finally addicted amateur photogs to precision (?) metering.

[jim_thompson6]

One can certainly shoot slide film without a meter - I do it 90% of the time. However, with the exception of perhaps EV 15 conditions, it might indeed be best to practice with a light meter first. Over time, you will be able to judge the light correctly most of the time. And when in doubt, bracket. Assuming that it isn't sunny weather, take your lightmeter, (D)SLR, P&S, etc. along with you. Then take readings in various lighting conditions (this will take more than a day or two). Try to estimate the lighting situation, and then consult the meter. It would also help if you read the article "Ultimate Exposure Computer" at fredparker.com He gives several helpful tips for judging the lighting conditions. Last, but not least, practice and have fun. Slides larger than 35mm are something to behold!

 

Good luck,

Jim

[frank r]

Hey everyone, somehow this drifted into a Sunny 16 versus metering thread. I should let you all know that I will be using my trusty incident meter with the cameras.

 

Sounds like I should be getting pretty good exposures with this set up.

[bueh]

Funny to see that only in the Classic forum people still heartily recommend exposure guesstimating to newbies who "have never shot slide film before". In most other forums people understand that film is precious and correct exposure comes from a good light metering technique. Think about it, who would tell anyone with a RZ67 to scoff those newfangled gadgets and shoot his 10 pictures by guesswork (with bracketing, of course)?

 

Sure, after years or decades of experience your guess will be within +/- one stop range from the correct exposure (I know mine is), but this applies mostly to daylight situations outdoors. People seem to forget that Parker's "Ultimate Exposure Computer" is for dedicated nature photographers, not amateur snapshooters who will shoot under any lighting. Good luck guestimating indoor light! I reckon amateur shooters embraced light meters not because there were inexpensive and Japanese, but because there are very useful tools for getting good picture results. If that is your mission, Frank, use one. If you want to brag on the internets about how good you can guess exposure, feel free to give it a try and don't be disappointed when you get only 1 in 3 or 1 in 10 keepers from your rolls.

[bueh]

Oops, sorry, I wrote my rant before I refreshed the page. Yep, it looks like you are set, take notes with each picture and study the results with them. Like Winfried said, most older shutters are still pretty reliable at the fast speeds, but if you can confirm this at that repair facility, it definitively won't hurt. What cameras are you going to use?

[mdcarma]

The lab I use has an E6 run everyday at 10 am. In before then, and slides back at noon. $4.50. I have a bunch of expired 120 slide film, use it to check out old cameras, quick-cheap results. This was shot with a Super Ikonta C, 530/2. Currently have all my boxes and folders loaded with slide film. Meter doesn't much matter with a box camera. But then, I shoot for fun.<div></div>

[dan flanders]

"Think about it, who would tell anyone with a RZ67 to scoff those newfangled gadgets and shoot his 10 pictures by guesswork (with bracketing, of course)?"<p> Here we are talking about taking pictures with old cameras that in many cases cost fifty bucks or less. Would you rather have a fancy meter that costs three times that much or would rather buy a couple more cameras?<p> Then there is the matter of the learning curve: Wear a boxing glove on your predominant hand for a day and see how long it will take you to learn to write with the other! It didn't take a lifetime of shooting wihout a meter to learn to estimate exposure; it took less than a 24 exposlure roll to get the right idea and with occasional bracketing you can learn it in a few hours. Life has gotten so easy for us in our affluent society that we just never consider that many of what we consider necessities were once luxuries -- and often acquired only after extended consideration. There is an added bonus to non-metered photography -- all you need is the camera and a pocket full of film. No need to be burdened by a lot of superfluous accessories.