nelson_ferreira Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 I want to get as much detail as possible in taking B&W photographs of Montreal at night with 35 mm Technical pan film. I would like to experiment the 25 ASA, to take pictures with an f8 aperture to maximize the image quality. That means very, very long exposure periods. Due to the law of reciprocity, the exposures will not be the same as indicated by the photometer. Has anyone ever tried TP at night shots? What were the times necessary at f8? And what about f38!!!!!!? Finally, is Pan F+ as good as TP? Thank you very much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m0002a Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Pan F+ is a very good film, but not as fine grained as Tech Pan. But Pan F+ is also faster. You might have some trouble taming the contrast with Tech Pan of a night scene with city lights. Of course, if you want lots of contrast, Tech Pan would work fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Check with Kodak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelson_ferreira Posted July 24, 2003 Author Share Posted July 24, 2003 Bill, I did check with Kodak: they never replied to me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m0002a Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Check the Technical Publication on the Kodak web site for reciprocity characteristics of the film. It's under the professional product tab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_goldfarb Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Or just use the search box on the front page of the Kodak website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg_smith4 Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Maybe its time to look look into a larger format? If you are near a good camera store you could probably rent a medium format camera for tha job. This would allow you to use a faster film and still get plenty of detail and fine grain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_eaton Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Actually, I've done this, and took really good night shots with TechPan before I moved to MF. It's fine grain, exellent reciprocity, and extended red sensitivity help cut through murky night air better than other slow speed B/W films. Use Technidol for development. Exposure...hmm. Try 30 seconds at F5.6, and do the math for other Fstops. Uh, bracket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor_johanson Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Nelson, unless you want to render on film continuity of motion, like flowing water, moving crowd, street traffic etc., the very long exposures make no sense, (they have to be long anyway) or rather the DETAILS in night scenes make no sense. At night there are no details. Only light and darkness. Using Tech Pan in such situations most certainly means disaster for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen hazelton Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 The reciprocity failure will also increase the contrast considerably? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Unless you've already done so I'd suggest another film for such a project. There are many other films which work well with long exposures. T-Max films suffer less from reciprocity failure and TMX will deliver excellent resolution. FP4+ is another excellent film for long-duration nighttime exposures. For a guide to baseline exposures (not counting reciprocity failure) use Fred Parker's Ultimate Exposure Computer charts: http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm From there you just need to use the film manufacturer's data on reciprocity adjustments. Finally, I'd recommend a compensating developer to keep highlights in check while allowing shadows to come up, unless you prefer a high contrast look. While opinions differ about what is or isn't a compensating developer I can vouch for Diafine and Microphen for night exposures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger krueger Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 I've found Tech-Pan in Photographer's Formulary TD-3 to be great for night shots, it does a great job of taming runaway highlights, much better than Technidol, and is a lot less prone to uneven development. It also gives EI 50-64. I usually set my meter for EI 64, but don't actually shoot the given exposure, rather shooting +1, +2 and +3 brackets. Night metering is tricky enough you want to bracket anyway. Do NOT use Tech Pan developed like ordinary B& W film--you need TD-3, or Technidol, or if you're a masochist, XTOL 1:4 at EI 10. Tech Pan is really only useful if you develop your own. No, Pan-F is not as good, nothing is, although Pan F is a very good film. It is good choice if you can't develop yourself. It gets really dense, but will hold highlight detail. TMX is the last film I'd ever use at night--it lives to blow out highlights. Fuji Acros is a good choice if you want avoid reciprocity-it has only a half stop of failure out quite a ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eduardo_benavidez1 Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 The master of nighttime photo the Belgian GILBERT FASTENAEKENS used to use medium format Tri-X exposed very large time and developed in D-76 or prefereably ID-11 developer. The technical data of this process are in some old issue of Camera & Darkroom mag, c.1994, and are the following: -Use f. 16 on M Format and f. 22 or f. 32 on 4x5� in order to get the dof he want. -Exposure times: from 15 to 30 minutes to 1 or more hours, in order to get an exceptional level of shadow details. -When exposition very long time on "bulb" he "walk around" when the the scene using the flash at low power in the darker zones. -Developing: Prewet in water with Photo-flo 1:400, 2 to 3 minutes as an esencial step. D-76 or ID-11 TWO PARTS, WATER ONE PART (OK: 2:1 NOT 1:2) at 19 degrees Celsius (not 20 nor 18 deg!!! because the Fastenaekens ONLY WORKS AT 19 deg.). Developing time 15 minutes, inverse ther tank in a VERY SLOW way each minute. -This way Gilbert get a very dense neg but when printing use a very personal manner to do it in order to get the "nighttime feeling" he want. -Printing: an Omega D-5, condenser head enlarger. Ilford Galerie paper. Agfa Neutol WA (warm tone) developer. ---------- Another master of the night photo, Michael Kenna, also uses TRI-X. Regards. Eduardo Benavídez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_eaton Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 ....That's nice, if you're shooting MF. <P> I really wish I could find those TechPan shots, but alas I've either given away or lost a lot of my old B/W work. A rule I have is to never keep old photos for more than a few years because I want to keep looking forward and re-inventing my technique.<P> I do keep very good notes on succesfull processes and films, and night work with TechPan was one of them. I disagree about using TMX over Techpan. Both are going to require a tripod and long exposures, so you might as well use the film that is going to yield better results. Assuming you are doing <b>your own processing</b>, and don't mind exposures of a minute or so, TechPan yields stunning nightscapes. It's elevated midtone contrast pulls detail out of blah night-time greys, and it's highlight blocking is no worse than the Tmax films. It's also much finer grained than any other B/W material on the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger krueger Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 A sample, Tech Pan in TD-3 for 15 minutes, four inversions/minute (I have since switched to 22 minutes, four inversions every three minutes) Zorki 2S, Voightlander 12mm, Schneider center ND filter, 2 minutes at either f8 or f11--Not sure of the f-stop, but I'm sure it was the middle bracket--2 stops of reciprocity compensation + 1.5 stops of center filter compensation..<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger krueger Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Same data as previous image...<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Well, heck, if we're gonna do show-and-tell of our successful bouts against the reciprocity demon... FP4+ @ EI 250 in Diafine. Don't recall the exact exposure but most of these under the last full moon were in the neighborhood of 10 minutes at f/8. I was relying on my F3HP's AE mode for these shots, which was remarkably accurate.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eduardo_benavidez1 Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Sorry Lex but you say 10 minutes.... please may explain all of us why the shadow of the glass havnt any blurring...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eduardo_benavidez1 Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Sorry Lex but you say 10 minutes.... please may explain all of us why the shadow of the glass havnt any blurring due the moonlight movement...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Eduardo, at certain times of year when the moon is full it seems to move relatively slowly in the sky. This past full moon was like that. It described a very high arc across the sky rather than skirting the horizon as it does at other times. Also, the moon was "setting" in the direction the camera was facing. So any movement would only lengthen the shadow, going essentially unnoticed. The night before I took some other photos from a different angle, relative to the path of the moon, and some blurring of the shadows was noticeable in the longer exposures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eduardo_benavidez1 Posted July 26, 2003 Share Posted July 26, 2003 Thank you Lex. In my little town the full moon is so beautiful... seems it last hours and hours in the same position on the clear, clean sky (take it as a poetic words). Eduardo Benavidez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_pearson3 Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 Don't know if you're still looking for advice -seems like you have plenty. I just wanted to add that camera aperatures are not 100% consistent. With long exposures (hours long), you'd be best off testing and finding the times for your camera and lens yourself. Also remember that air temperature plays into reciprocity failure as well, especially on cold Montreal nights. Take notes. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now