 Charles E. Mann |
What happens with exposure values are changed? Maybe someone can ease my mind. I was playing around with with the exposure value on my film camera (one more benefit of shooting digital)while shooting a sunset. The last picture was -2 I forgot to change it back and didn't notice until after I was finished shooting a wedding for some friends. I used a flash for the wedding (inside & kinda of dark in the church), some outside pictures (sunny). I have a Nikon N80 with SB600 flash. I havn't dropped off the film to be processed yet. The wedding was kinda of a favor they were on a low low budget but they might give me something (if there are pictures. I was just going to take the picture to Costco or Ritz. My question is what are these pictures going to look like? Is there anything that I can do to save these pictures or is the damage already do. Thanks in Advance for any help. Charles P.S. now I see why everyone always cautions against wedding photos for friends. Hopfully this is my one & only disaster story.
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Charles, by setting the camera to EV-2 you are effectively telling it that you want to underexpose the shots by 2 f-stops. To understand this, first you must realize that a camera's light meter does not have any intelligence; it just measures the light in the scene and attempts to ensure that the right amount of light hits the film based on a)the film's sensitivity , or ISO, b)the aperture, or f-stop and c)the shutter speed. For most scenes, the meter is fine, but some lighting situations can "fool" it. For instance, imagine you were taking shots at a concert, where the performer is bathed in bright spotlights but the stage around her is dark. The camera's meter would see a lot of dark and a little light, and expose the film accordingly. However, you, as the smart photographer who understandds the limits of the technology, would then tell the meter to purposely override it's initial calculation and "underexpose" based on what it sees. This will better ensure that the performer is not overexposed and that the background goes very dark. So that's why this kind of control even exists on your camera - to allow you to maintain the automatic exposure on those occassions where the basic light meter may consistently be wrong. Now that it's done, there's not much you can do to save that one last shot that is probably underexposed. The good news is, if you used print film, that negative film is pretty capable of handling over- and under-exposure - so it is possible that workable image may show up after all. I would recommend that you bring the roll to a better photo lab than Costco - the folks at Ritz mght be better able to tease out a good image from that last shot (though not as part of the original run; they might need to take that negative and print it separately for an improved outcome.) Let us know how things come out, will you?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
I think Bob mis-read your post and thought you had one shot that was underexposed. As I understand it, all the shots of the wedding were underexposed by two stops. Is that correct? If so, I would have to say that you are pushing the limits of underexposure for the film. If you had overexposed by two stops, I would tell you not to worry but two stops underexposure could be a problem. Which film did you use?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Charles E. Mann |
Thanks Guys, Yes the whole roll was under exposed. I used Fuji superia 200 speed.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
Well, Fuji Superia 200 has an exposure latitude of 2 stops under and two over so. at 2 stops of underexposure, you are pushing the limits. Considering the fact that a meter reading off a white wedding gown is probably going to cause you to be underexposed anyway (since the meter reads the white gown as 18% gray), I would send the film to a pro lab and have them push it by a couple of stops. I'm not a big fan of pushing film but it might be your best bet.
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Oops - sorry I misinterpreted. If indeed the whole roll was underexposed, then take Kerry's advice and go to a pro lab and have the film push processed (this is whre they leave it in the developing solution a bit longer to compensate for the underexposure - it leads to some losst contrast and increased grain but they shots may be quite acceptable). In fact, talk to the folks at the lab - they might suggest a 1-stop push. Don't bother with any of the 1-hour type places - they can't control this type of situation in the equipment they use (and probably wouldn't know what you are talking about in most cases)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Charles E. Mann |
I know it's been a couple of weeks since you guys give me some help, but I have started to process the rolls of film I messed up. I had them pushed two stops; they're a little grainy I had heard that could happen but the important part is that I got some usable images. Thanks again, That's one mistake I hope to never make again
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
Glad to hear things worked out fairly well. It is better to have grainy shots than severely underexposed shots. It has happened to all of us. When you get really experienced, you will be like me. I mever nake mistakes. LOL
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||