PDA

View Full Version : Getting the most out of color negative film?



Blumine
3-Oct-2008, 16:45
I have been given a project that will require me to shoot on color negative film. Up to now, 99% of my color work as been shot on mostly velvia & provia. But, I will be shooting a series of landscapes that will have a very wide dynamic range of about 8 to 10 stops, using GND filters wont be practical due to the lighting patterns. I have never used negative film other than BW, so I am trying to figure out how to ensure I get the full latitude out of the film.

I plan to use Fuji 160S, I have already shot a couple of rolls in 120. I bracketed several shots between ei100 and 200 so far the results look pretty good. Though, I am iust wondering if anyone has any further tips or thoughts about exposing this film. Mainly I am trying to ensure plenty of detail in both the highlights as well as the shadows. The film will both be scanned as well as printed traditionally if that makes any difference.

Thanks kindly for all the help.

Blumine

Juergen Sattler
3-Oct-2008, 17:20
As you know already, color negative film is much more forgiving than slide film. You can over expose by easily one stop and still be able to print it without any problems - in fact it is often better to over expose for scanning to get more details in the shadows. Keep experimenting with 120 and even 35mm film - you'll get the hang of it quickly. I have never workd with Fuji 160s - sorry!

Ron Marshall
3-Oct-2008, 17:49
I normally shoot it at ISO 125. It scans very well!

Bruce Watson
4-Oct-2008, 08:00
I plan to use Fuji 160S,... Mainly I am trying to ensure plenty of detail in both the highlights as well as the shadows. The film will both be scanned as well as printed traditionally if that makes any difference.

Ain't no reason to be afraid of using color negative film. It'll capture just about any subject brightness range (SBR) you can throw at it. And with scanning at least that capture makes it to print beautifully. It does so well that I haven't shot any tranny film in over six years now. All my color work is color negatives, and I'm one of those crazies who like to shoot in high contrast direct sunlight on occasion. Like this passion flower (http://www.achromaticarts.com/big_image.php?path=flowers&img_num=2) done on 160PortraVC.

The deal with C-41 films is that development manipulation to control the highlight density is minimal at best. You can't really pull development at all without getting some level of color cast. Pushing is somewhat easier; a one stop push doesn't result in much of a color cast at all. Thing is, with large SBR pushing isn't what you need.

This leads one inexplicably to the conclusion that you have to expose for the shadows and the highlights will fall where they may and there's not a lot you can do about it. This isn't necessarily a bad thing; properly processed C-41 films are pretty darn linear out 10-12 stops or maybe more.

For scanning this works just fine. With an SBR of 10-11 stops this still results in a Dmax somewhat less than you'd get from a full range tranny. IOW, if your scanner can read through your trannies, it can certainly read through your negatives. What you'll get from this is a full range scan file, with your required details in the shadows (if your exposure is right) and your required details in the highlights (if your scanner reads them well). The right drum scanner / software can do this no problem at all; I do it all the time. Many flatbeds can too.

For darkroom work, a large SBR captured on film results in a large density range on the film. This can result in blown out highlights on your print if the paper you are using can't handle the film's density. If you can't dodge and burn sufficiently to get what you want from a print, you might want to consider making contrast masks. Doable, if somewhat painful. What little experience I have with this was like 20 years ago but surely someone here has relevant experience.

All I'm saying is, no reason to worry about negative film. And you don't have to do anything special to "ensure I get the full latitude out of the film."

Blumine
7-Oct-2008, 17:57
Thank you all for the very helpful insight.

Ron....125 was pretty much what seemed to work the best for me. Nice to see my guess was pretty.

Bruce,

Thank you for the that information. It gave me what I needed to know. BTW great flower!

Thanks again to all of you.

Blumine

Lei Meng
18-Oct-2008, 00:08
For your reference, I just did a comparison between 160s and astia 100f (both 4x5). I shot 160s at iso100, with exact same shooting parameter as astia. Both films are scanned by Microtek 1800f at 1800 dpi. Picture shows the cropped detail, no sharpen and no resizing. 160s certainly has more shadow details. 160s has better resolution too, as seen from the picture and the MTF chart.