Shooting Film advice...(long exposure) !

Morrisseeee

I loaded a couple of films into a borrowed Olympus OM10 a few days ago, they're in for processing today, so should be ready tomorrow........ooooh the excitement ! (wierd when digital is shoot and look at the display!!).
Anyways, I tried a long exposure, this was the scene :

....this was at 1sec on my Olympus E510 with a 28mm lens at F16.
But I didn't know what exposure time to use on the OM10 (with a 50mm lens, ie. similar FOV to the E510 set-up) ? ! So I put it in manual/bulb and used a few different timings, with the remote shutter release. I then put it back on Auto and it did its own thing (at around 1sec).
So.......what advice can ye give for further experiments with long exposures, could I use my E510 as a (rough) guide ?

Fajitas!

Well, one thing to bear in mind, different films react differently to long exposures, making longer exposures... longer.

Have an aul Google for reciprocity failure.

DaireQuinlan

Providing the ISO/aperture are the same then the shutter speed will be aswell. There's an important caveat though. There's a phenomenon known as reciprocity failure which affects films. Basically it results in the actual required exposure time being radically longer than the metered time for long exposures. Different films have different reciprocity characteristics so you have to look up the datasheets. A lot of colour films start to exhibit wierd colour casts aswell with longer exposures. Velvia is a classic example (goes purple IIRC on exposures > couple of seconds). Its definately one clear advantage digital has over film.

sineadw

What they said

I'm starting to mess about with film again these days too. Its tricky. But if you'd been to the DCC meet this week (B&W film, IR film and Xpan shots from an absolute master) you'd see why its still 100% worth it. I just wish I was better in the darkroom..

duffarama

Morrissee I'm about to PM you sir

Simplicius

most films suffer reciprocity failure in long exposures except Fuji Neopan 100, but the additional time it isn't difficult though to work out for B&W films. I have had sucessful exposures with neopan up to 10 minutes.... I remember this vividly because it was around -2 and I was on Howth Pier at 2.00 am, freezing my hands off holding the cable release and a stopwatch.

As Daire Quinlan said earlier colour films tend to get wierd casts after a long exposure so stick to B&W and you can develop at home and save money. although 1 second should not trouble most colour films.

Simplicius

I forgot your other question: !! whoops

using another slr as a spot meter is perfectly acceptable, That is what I do at night when I need an accurate idea of a scene. Then just bracket your shots a stop each way to ensure you get the negative that sings.

Also if you are shooting at night high contrast settings. Streetlamp over wet cobbles for example. read the cobbles and then underexpose them by two stops and let the bright lights look after themselves. this should get you sorted 90% of time.

Then to ensure shadow detail (B&W film only) use Stand Development to bring out the shadow detail and stop the highlights getting blown out.

Hope this helps

darraghsherwin

Not all films suffer from reciprocity failure to the same levels, Velvia 100F is alot more forgiving than Velvia 50. Velvia 50 will start failing after 30 secs.
Some of the tungsten films like Fuji T64 can stand up to several minutes of exposure without any reciprocity failure.
Most manufacturers have tech sheets with timings for reciprocity failure of the individual film.

For a scene like that I would shoot Velvia 100F, spot meter of the brightest highlight in the scene using either my spot meter or a DSLR.
BTW, nice shot

Darragh

cnocbui

The OP was indicating exposure times of around a second, and all of a sudden people start going on about reciprocity failure.

The OP even posted a sample of a daytime scene.

Reciprocity failure It is not an issue here.

DaireQuinlan

cnocbui wrote: »

The OP was indicating exposure times of around a second, and all of a sudden people start going on about reciprocity failure.
The OP even posted a sample of a daytime scene.
Reciprocity failure It is not an issue here.

Not in this case, no. However Moriseee was making a general query about whether or not he could use his digital body to meter for scenes he plans to shoot using film. In most cases, yes. However if he starts doing lonnnnnng exposures then that's not the case. This is what was pointed out.

humberklog

Mind you cnocbui in the spirit of such a forum it doesn't only have to be the OP that gets an answer for their own query partaining to their own entry level. Because now I've got a clever (if alienating for the masses word) for what I was terming "turning out gank" for overly perlonged exposures.

But for the OP and back to basic english and understanding: I've pushed that free fuji film (Colour ISO200) out to 12 secs in low light to 6 secs in medium light. I never use a meter so couldn't tell you a more indept description other than medium and low light.

Note pad, pencil, a few free rolls, a cheap developer and a day or two of trying out is always my number one route. Can't say it's fool proof though!

cnocbui

humberklog wrote: »

But for the OP and back to basic english and understanding: I've pushed that free fuji film (Colour ISO200) out to 12 secs in low light to 6 secs in medium light. I never use a meter so couldn't tell you a more indept description other than medium and low light.

I have shot fujichrome 100 with an hour long exposure to render a landscape to appear as if shot in daylight when it was really lit by the moon ;-)

humberklog

cnocbui wrote: »

I have shot fujichrome 100 with an hour long exposure to render a landscape to appear as if shot in daylight when it was really lit by the moon ;-)

Pics or it didn't happen! :pac:

DaireQuinlan

cnocbui wrote: »

I have shot fujichrome 100 with an hour long exposure to render a landscape to appear as if shot in daylight when it was really lit by the moon ;-)

Which fuji film ? Was it just some unnamed fuji slide film ? I was just going through film datasheets there to check for reciprocity characteristics. Apparently Provia 100f has no adjustment needed out to 2 minutes. Ilford films have poor characteristics. Pan F / 50 actually needs to be compensated for anything longer than 1 sec. You live and learn

Burnt

Astrophotography for the Amateur by Michael A. Covington is an excellent if slight date book, mostly like the name suggest it covers astrophotography, but details extensively issues surrounding reciprocity failure hypering etc...

cnocbui

humberklog wrote: »

Pics or it didn't happen! :pac:

I will have a look for it in 6 weeks or so as I am no where near my slides at the moment.

Simplicius

cnocbui wrote: »

I will have a look for it in 6 weeks or so as I am no where near my slides at the moment.

hmm seems like we have a failure to reciprocate reciprocity failure is alive and well !

Morrisseeee

Some great replies there folks, many recipricol thanks
Update: I got 4 films developed (very expensive ! eeek), I won't be rushing out to take 4 more ! I'm happy with the results, even the 1 sec & 3 sec exposures on a ASA200 color film. My conclusion about my first 35mm film experiment (with an Olympus OM10) is that it tends to over-expose on Auto settings. Maybe thats me, maybe its the cameras metering, maybe its the processing, I dunno ! I'll take a pic of the 6*4 tonight to demonstrate. I'd love to process the film myself but I just don't have the 'know-how' or time or room at the mo.
I got an 8*10 print done (digital version) and I'm v happy with it, I may stcstc to print a bigger one !

DaireQuinlan

Morrisseeee wrote: »

I may stcstc to print a bigger one !

Has Stcstc actually become so ubiquitous that we've started to verb him (or her) ??!?

"I'm going to stcstc that one at about 8x10 or so"

"Does anyone know the best place to stcstc my shots ?"

-edit-

how bizarre ! that was actually ME reading that quote above as "I may stcstc a bigger one"
In my defense, I've so far this morning spilt TWO cups of coffee on myself, so I'm not working at full mental capacity. Which isn't that great at the best of times anyway ...

-edit-

Morrisseeee

This is the film version: (took this with my E510 from the 6*4 print !!).



Its certainly more colorful/saturated than the original un-edited digital version



This is the edited one, ie. with shadows lifted, especially under the arch.



BTW, which do ye prefer ? (as I plan to print it large, A3 !)
1: Saturated/colorful version (like the film one above)
2. Dark version, ie. no detail in shadows
3. Light one, details in shadows

PS. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. :)

DaireQuinlan

I don't think you can really judge what the film version looks like from a digital shot of a 6x4 minilab print from a digital scan of the original negative

Particularly in terms of colour and contrast, minilabs tend to have everything turned up to 11. They'll bump up the contrast and saturation and then over-sharpen the remains. If you could provide a unedited* scan of the original negative you might have a basis for comparison.

*unedited in the sense that its been inverted, colour corrected for the negative mask and auto-leveled.

Morrisseeee

I don't think you can really judge what the film version looks like from a digital shot of a 6x4 minilab print

yeah obviously, doh, silly me

No seriously, I just want peoples opinions on the 3 'thumbnails' above, as it gives a quick guide to their differences. I'd love to process & get a large print of the film version for comparison.
Looking at other 6*4 prints, which were exposed a little longer, the bridge and certain parts of the trees start to 'blow-out', but then this could probably be 'sorted-out' if processing the negative yourself (or professionally).

If you could provide a unedited* scan of the original negative you might have a basis for comparison.

oh I wish I could !