Processing question

[Michael Lloyd]

I am about to start a project where I'll be shooting local, small town, well established storefronts at night. As a newb large format photographer I am just now getting comfortable shooting during the day so shooting at night seems daunting. I do it all of the time with my DSLR's but, not to be Captain Obvious here, shooting with a DSLR "ain't large format".

My project is going to be very self limiting. I'm going to use either Acros 100 or Delta 100 and I'm going to only allow myself one sheet per subject. I'm not doing it to save film. I've done this before when I wanted to get away from spray and pray with the DSLR and it helped immensely. Of course I still had instant gratification with the DSLR so the risk of missing an image was neglible (if I really wanted it I could just cheat and shoot another one :) ) Limiting myself to one sheet should help me to slow down even more.

So the question is:

I also have some Portra 160 and Portra 400. I was thinking about shooting a sheet of Portra 160, of the same scene, at the same settings, every time I use a sheet of black and white. Both black and white films are ISO 100. The Portra 160 is just a tad faster. Would I need to drop the exposure by 2/3 of a stop when I switch films or is my plan to use the same settings and deal with it in processing workable?

I know this sounds like a pretty simple question but where I'm going with this is that I know about push processing. I used to push my slide film and take it to a lab. All they needed to know was what ISO I used. Now I am my lab (lord help me) and I'm not at all sure if I can or should compensate for the 2/3 stop difference in ISO rating of the film (and the dynamic range difference) when I process or not. Whatever color sheets I expose will be my first attempt at processing color in a Jobo, which adds a whole new dimension to the question.

If I add to my stack of sheets in the "oh crap" box I'll be disappointed, but I have a lot of experience with that now so it's not quite so painful as when I DESTROYED 5 negatives made at Shiloh Battlefield NP. I drove a lot of miles out of the way to make the images and one stupid mistake with the Jobo ruined them all. Can you tell that it still stings a bit to think about it?

The stuff I'm about to start shooting is all local and it will be there for a second chance (or third) if I hose something up. In other words, this is a big, relatively costly, experiment for me but I hope it becomes a worthwhile learning experience. What I don't want to do is needlessly waste sheets of film by starting off with a bad premise.

[Leigh]

I would use the same exposure for the Portra 160 as for the b&w films.

Your subject/scene is not "average", which is what the ASA speed is calculated for.
You have much more detail in the dark areas that you want to retain.

Highlights (light bulbs etc) will always blow in night shots, so I don't think the high end matters.

- Leigh

[StoneNYC]

Delta100 is much cheaper, both are excellent looking, and Acros has much better reciprocity characteristics, both push well, Acros pushes well, haven't tried pushing Delta yet. Delta is more easily accessible.

General rule for B&W is add / subtract 2 minutes per stop with most developers, probably less with something like HC-110(B)

[frotog]

While it may seem counter-intuitive, you will discover that you'll get much better results pulling the film rather than pushing. The brightness range of artificially lit night scenes is extreme. Therefore, compression (more exposure, less development) will yield the best results. Depending on how much room you're putting around the lit storefronts my guess is that exposures will be in the 15" - 30" range at f22. When shooting color for urban night scenes I tell my lab to pull 1-1/2 stops. I would not worry about the ASA discrepancy between films.

[StoneNYC]

While it may seem counter-intuitive, you will discover that you'll get much better results pulling the film rather than pushing. The brightness range of artificially lit night scenes is extreme. Therefore, compression (more exposure, less development) will yield the best results. Depending on how much room you're putting around the lit storefronts my guess is that exposures will be in the 15" - 30" range at f22. When shooting color for urban night scenes I tell my lab to pull 1-1/2 stops. I would not worry about the ASA discrepancy between films.

Remember that "better" is relative, and the OP may be looking for contrast ;)

[jbenedict]

I know this sounds like a pretty simple question but where I'm going with this is that I know about push processing. I used to push my slide film and take it to a lab. All they needed to know was what ISO I used. Now I am my lab (lord help me) and I'm not at all sure if I can or should compensate for the 2/3 stop difference in ISO rating of the film (and the dynamic range difference) when I process or not. Whatever color sheets I expose will be my first attempt at processing color in a Jobo, which adds a whole new dimension to the question.

If I add to my stack of sheets in the "oh crap" box I'll be disappointed, but I have a lot of experience with that now so it's not quite so painful as when I DESTROYED 5 negatives made at Shiloh Battlefield NP. I drove a lot of miles out of the way to make the images and one stupid mistake with the Jobo ruined them all. Can you tell that it still stings a bit to think about it?.

I can appreciate your premise of 'getting it right the first time" and not firing off a flurry of shots which can be done with a digicam. Even before the cost of LF materials exploded, 'bracketing' was pretty darn expensive. I started with 8x10 and learned quickly about careful exposure and processing. However, as you begin this project, I would suggest shooting two sheets per shot for awhile. If you mess up the processing on the first one, you can make a change on the second one. You need to learn a few things about processing and having another sheet ready to process if you mess up is a lot easier than going out and shooting it again. In some cases you won't be able to shoot it again- the light, the weather, any one of a million things. When you are confident in your processing, you can go back to your original intention.

[Kirk Gittings]

I've shot thousands of sheets of 160 ASA color neg film at 100 because I liked it better that way and it matched the exposure of my transparency film. Always worked fine for my my purposes-architecture.

[agregov]

+1 on shooting Portra 160 at 100. You want to make sure you don't lose shadow detail. As for the Jobo, as many people in the forum have mentioned in many threads, color processing is very straight forward, often easier than b&w. Just make sure you control your temperature and stay tight on the development time (usually 3:15 mins).

[Jim Jones]

Consider shooting in the evening or morning when there may be enough skylight to boost shadow detail rather than in the inky darkness of midnight.

[StoneNYC]

Consider shooting in the evening or morning when there may be enough skylight to boost shadow detail rather than in the inky darkness of midnight.

However then you also need color correction filters for the blue cast in the shadows and then you lose light anyway ;)

[Leigh]

However then you also need color correction filters for the blue cast in the shadows and then you lose light anyway ;)
A "blue cast" in b&w film???

The OP said in his original post that he's using Acros or Delta 100.

- Leigh

[StoneNYC]

A "blue cast" in b&w film???

The OP said in his original post that he's using Acros or Delta 100.

- Leigh

Yes, however there was mention of shooting Portra160 at 100 and I got on thinking color was also subject matter in the thread. :/

[Roger Thoms]

A "blue cast" in b&w film???

The OP said in his original post that he's using Acros or Delta 100.

- Leigh

Leigh maybe you should re-read the OP's original post and your reply in post #2.

Roger

[frotog]

Remember that "better" is relative, and the OP may be looking for contrast ;)

Yeah, blown highlights and blocked shadows in night shots maybe what the OP is looking for, lol. As far as contrast - it'll be there no matter what.

[StoneNYC]

Yeah, blown highlights and blocked shadows in night shots maybe what the OP is looking for, lol. As far as contrast - it'll be there no matter what.

Umm yes... That's what in saying... Some people like that look....

Just because you don't like blown highlights doesn't mean everyone is like you...

[Kirk Gittings]

You really don't need to filter color neg film in-camera to adjust for shifts in the color of the scene except when the difference is extreme. It is easily done in the print or the scan.

[frotog]

Umm yes... That's what in saying... Some people like that look....

Just because you don't like blown highlights doesn't mean everyone is like you...


Yes, advise the OP to push the film. Nothing better to do with an extreme subject brightness range like a lit storefront window at night than push the film, lol! That way you can get those glorious, detail-free highlights that you could easily coax out of a flat neg of said scene but without having a choice.

Never mind experience and knowledge, guess it's all just personal preference, right?

[StoneNYC]

Yes, advise the OP to push the film. Nothing better to do with an extreme subject brightness range like a lit storefront window at night than push the film, lol! That way you can get those glorious, detail-free highlights that you could easily coax out of a flat neg of said scene but without having a choice.

Never mind experience and knowledge, guess it's all just personal preference, right?

Yes... It is about personal preference... If you think otherwise then you should stop trying to be an artist and become a teacher... You'll never do anything great if you don't break the rules, you'll just be another lemming.

[Kirk Gittings]

Please. Give us a break. What have you done that is "great". You really think you are such an accomplished artist that you can make such pronouncements without looking like a complete fool?

Artist make aesthetic choices based on knowing their medium and their tools. If one is getting blown highlights and blocked shadows because they chose to do it that's one thing. If they are getting them because they don't know how to control these things it is quite another.

[StoneNYC]

Please. Give us a break. What have you done that is "great". You really think you are such an accomplished artist that you can make such pronouncements without looking like a complete fool?

Artist make aesthetic choices based on knowing their medium and their tools. If one is getting blown highlights and blocked shadows because they chose to do it that's one thing. If they are getting them because they don't know how to control these things it is quite another.

I didn't say I'm great, I didn't tout being good at anything, I spoke of personal preference, and that art is personal.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Michael, I think it may be best for you if you just get out there and do it. Learn from your mistakes and take indepth notes. Then post some results here and let us know how it went, what you learnt, etc. Good luck!

[Fred L]

Michael, I think it may be best for you if you just get out there and do it.

this is the best way to learn afaic. you can learn from other's mistakes but making your own will get the grey matter fired up. experience is the best teacher I believe the saying goes ;)

[Kirk Gittings]

Yes... It is about personal preference... If you think otherwise then you should stop trying to be an artist and become a teacher... You'll never do anything great if you don't break the rules, you'll just be another lemming.


I didn't say I'm great, I didn't tout being good at anything, I spoke of personal preference, and that art is personal.

Exactly the point. And what has your philosophy of art accomplished for you that you are so ready to preach to everyone else? How can you tell other people what it takes to be great when you haven't managed to get there yourself?

[StoneNYC]

Exactly the point. And what has your philosophy of art accomplished for you that you are so ready to preach to everyone else? How can you tell other people what it takes to be great when you haven't managed to get there yourself?

Point

But great is also relative. I've made some amazing images (to me) and a lot of crap.

I still believe that blowing highlights on purpose for artistic reasons can be just as valuable as a dull non-contrast, good shadow detail image. I do know how to purposefully do both.

[Kirk Gittings]

The point isn't what you know. People were offering suggestions because we don't know what the OP knows. He hasn't been back to tell us.

[Bill_1856]

Shoot it with your digital.
LF should be a pleasure, not a chore. It is already enough of a PITA without setting absurd and arbitrary restrictions. Even if it is just a "learning experience," the goal should be to get the best result possible.

[Brian C. Miller]

... I'm going to use either Acros 100 or Delta 100 ... I also have some Portra 160 and Portra 400. ...

... this is a big, relatively costly, experiment for me but I hope it becomes a worthwhile learning experience. What I don't want to do is needlessly waste sheets of film by starting off with a bad premise.

Do you have a film camera other than LF? Experimentation is the perfect thing to do before committing the LF film to the project. Work out your exposures with roll film, and then you'll know what to do with LF. Used 35mm cameras are cheap, very very very cheap.