One stop under, How much darker?

[wuyeah]

<p>Hello guys,<br>

I am still shooting film so it is hard for me to use digital camera and test for a result right the way. Can someone help me shooting a sample of comparison between 5.6/30 compare with 5.6/60 or any combo you like with a stop under.<br>

Well....i was shooting street today and shot a friendly stranger. After the shoot, I found out my setting was one stop under. It is the classic case that there is no way to do it over. I feel kinda bad and it bug me whole afternoon. Of course I keep telling myself there are other elements that can go wrong too, like hand shake, stuff that is not sharp....etc. I should not keep thinking about it.<br>

But I am still curious about how much difference can one stop under make. Is one stop under an easy fix in photoshop?</p>

[johnw63]

<p>Slide or print film? 1 stop is rather noticable in slides, and not a lot can be done, if it is too dark. I think with print film, it's not at all so bad.</p>

<p> </p>

[seismiccwave]

<p>If you are shooting film then ask the lab to push the developing a little. If you are shooting digital that depends on whether you shot jpeg or RAW. <br>

1 stop is not the end of the world. Don't worry about it.</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>From what I understand you`re using digital.<br>

If you`re one stop off, it could be fixable in Ps but with a bit of loose, even if you`re shooting RAW. That loose could be minimal or negligible, but it`s certainly a loose.<br>

You`ll find that noise is increased after boosting the wrong exposure in PS, and detail is somewhat lost, specially at higher ISO. If you expose correctly <i>for digital</i>, noise coould be reduced to the minimum in order to get the most of your camera.<br>

Here it is a sample pic taken with a D700 @1600ISO + 50/1.8AFD, 1/30 - f5.6. It could be the "correct" expsure:</p><div></div>

[jose_angel]

<p>Check how looks a 1 stop underexposed shoot: </p><div></div>

[jose_angel]

<p>Check here a 100% crop of the darker area, where exposure seems correct to me. See noise level and shadow detail:</p><div></div>

[jose_angel]

<p>And now the last one, check on this 100% crop from the 1 stop underexposed shoot how noise is increased and detail lost, even shooting RAW. Exposure has been boosted by one stop using Aperture to match the "correct exposure" pic (I don`t have Ps or any other software intalled on this computer). <br /> Of course this sample could be a bit extreme as shot at high ISO; using the lowest ISO and for many subject types this could not be an issue, I think.</p><div></div>

[jose_angel]

<p>... and if you`re shooting film, as mentinoned above it vary considerably from a wide ranged negative to a short latitude chrome film. Things are way more unpredictable here, I think.</p>

[peter_mounier]

<p>If you are just shooting at the aperture the light meter tells you to shoot, then the answer is, it depends on the subject. If you were shooting a dark subject, the light meter probably would want you to (wrongly) over expose the shot to bring the tonal values up to a medium tone rather than a dark tone. That's because light meters will always make the scene medium in tone (zone 5). If you were shooting a lighter than average subject, the meter would (wrongly, again) have you underexpose to arrive at that same medium tone (zone 5). So here's what would happen... if you shot a black man with a dark coat, and shaded buildings in the background, the meter would have you open up the aperture to lighten up the pic because all the tones in the image would be below average in reflectance. If you shot a white guy in a white coat with white snow in the background, the meter would have you stop down because the scene has above average reflectance. In reality, you would want the dark scene to look dark, and the light scene to be lighter than average because that's the way it naturally occurs. Of course, if the scene was of average reflectance, which most scenes are, then you actually did underexpose the shot.</p>

<p>Peter</p>

[wuyeah]

<p>Thank you all for helping me to answer this question. I felt I've never learn so much. I was shooting a chrome film. The subject was actually a very dark African American. The subject's skin tone wasn't even register in my mind until Peter mention it to me just now. Thank Jose for your picture sample, it really helps me a lot. I guess in this case, I will finish shooting the roll of the film with the same matter, one stop under, and ask the local developer to push a bit so the whole roll will get a uniformed treatment. How much should I tell local shop to push? If I tell the whole story would they know exactly what to do?</p>

[johnw63]

<p>If you were shooting up close, you would WANT to under expose from what the meter would tell you, on a very dark skin tone. If it were up to the meter, everyones skin would be medium grey.</p>

<p> </p>

[jose_angel]

<p><em>"How much should I tell local shop to push?"</em><br /> If your film has been underexposed (pushed) by one stop, simply mention this issue to the shop. They must know what to do.<br /> If you have been using e.g., Velvia 100F, and <i>you know</i> all your shots are one stop underexposed, you have been shooting this film at 200ISO. It means you need a <em>one stop push processing.</em><br /> As in the digital samples above, you will have a loss in shadow detail and increased graininess and contrast. Given that chrome film latitude is narrower, I bet it will be more noticeable.</p>