Current Color films for LF night photography

[grafnik]

I'm undertaking a project for my college course in which I plan to have 'movement' within the night environment as a base concept. The varying subjects will be star trails, traffic, etc....with the locations being of some significant interest but not within an urban environment. I'll be using a Graflex Crown Graphic for the LF shots, but will also be backing up those shots with a MF and digital SLR.

Given the recent changes in film availability, coupled with my lack of color film usage, I'm hoping to see if anyone here has some recommendations for me to explore. I've read up on some of the films available, but the wall I keep running into is the ISO. One thing I should mention as well...though it's not definite, but one of the shots I hope to include will be the Aurora Borealis. Its this scenario that has me perplexed, as the film shots I've seen have been ISO 400-800 for a 20-30 second exposure (roughly). Most of the film I've found has been ISO 100-200, and it's understood that pictures of the AB tend to be less appealing the longer the shutter's open. I know that in any given situation some films will not react 'by the book'...and this is where I hope you guys/gals will chime in and give up 2/5 of a nickel. My thanks in advance for your time and patience.

PS.....I did do my best to see if there were any relevant threads before posting this, so if I've missed it, please excuse the noob and point a finger to the general direction I must head in.

[tgtaylor]

Although it is a medium saturated film, Fuji Provia probably has the best recriprocity - 4 minutes with a 1/3 stop compensation and not recommended at 8 minutes according to the data sheet.

For color negative, here is an example of Fuji Pro 160-C (saturated) exposed for 20 or so seconds in a very dark church (no flash)



Thomas

[grafnik]

Nice shot Thomas! I've just found a webpage where a guy who's taken it upon himself to test certain types of color film for RF Law. In it he claims that the Provia 100F has much better light sensitivity at ISO 100 than ISO 800 films of old. Given the fact that the camera I'm using has an F/4.3 lens, I'm in a quandry as how to approach this. Should I treat it as ISO 800 or something in between the stated ISO rating and that?

[John NYC]

If you want to stay in the range of 20-30 seconds, I'm not sure that using LF -- where you often need to stop down to f/16, f/22 or more -- is going to be the right choice. I typically need 2 to 8 minute exposures for my night 8x10 urban landscapes.

I have been using Kodak E100G primarily. I recently have added Provia 100F and it is excellent as well and has less reciprocity failure. For C-41 films, Ektar 100 also works really well.

[grafnik]

Thanks John. I do intend to 'test' the film with the MF before I make the purchase for the LF sheets. Am also going to 'get to know' my LF with some b/w film, as I can process and print that at the college. At the moment the Provia seem to be getting more of my attention but am still wide open for suggestions.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Infinity shots like star trails do not require f/16 or f/22, it's more about lens design and controlling aberrations. Look for a Plasmat (rather than a Tessar or triplet) design and you might find F/5.6 or f/8 is workable. Too, most Fujichrome can be pushed 1-2 stops.

[tgtaylor]

Thanks grafnik.

I have never shot the Aurora Borealis but from what you say I would shoot it with Provia at ISO100 - you should have 4 minutes to work with without worrying about a color shift.

As far as the aperture, Ivan is correct; you don't want to stop down more than 1 stop. in fact, the church above was shot wide open (f2.8) in order to bring the exposure time to less than 30 seconds ( according to the data sheet, Fuji 160-C requires 1 stop compensation at 32 seconds).

Thomas

[grafnik]

The LF camera I have has an Optar (Graflex) f/4.7 lens, and for almost all the shots but the one of the Aurora Borealis, the Provia would work just fine. The reason for the minimal exposure time for the AB shot is that the blasted thing moves. In order to keep it from looking like a huge cloud of colored gas in the sky, I'd like to keep the exposure time down (so that the vertical streaks are more noticable). I have read somewhere online that all film can be pushed, and the particular results of pushing slide film is that you lose some of the shadows, gain highlights...and practically double the cost of the processing. I'm more than willing to shoot a roll of 120 to find this out before incurring the expense of the larger film sheets, but the question still remains...is there a current LF slide/neg film out there with an ISO of at least 400 for us night time enthusiasts, or am I just missing the boat? Thanks again to Thomas and Ivan, btw.

[tgtaylor]

If the motion you refer to is due to the earth's rotation, then mounting your camera on a clock-driven mount or telescope will solve that. If the motion is due to the flow of charged particles in the cloud, which I suspect it is, then it will be difficult, but not impossible, to document that.

Back in 1997, when comet Hale-Bopp appeared bright in the skies, I had purchased a 10" Meade Schmidt telescope. The view of the comet's head thru the telescope was spectacular - you could see in real time the movement of jet streams of gas emanating from and flowing around the comet's head. At the time I was a novice with the scope and photography and tried to capture it at prime focus (2500mm) on color negative film with a 35mm Pentax K1000. Walmart, were I brought film in to be developed and printed back then, returned a green blob print. I may still have that negative and when I find it I'll reprint it and eliminate the color cast to see what I really got. In any event high magnification will allow you a short shutter time which would enable you the opportunity to show the movements of the jets.

Thomas

[Ivan J. Eberle]

In 1997, was working at the MIRA Observatory and got to piggyback my 300 f/2.8 and Pentax LX on the 36" telescope there for the tracking of Hale-Bopp. IIRC, used Sensia 200 for a 12 minute exposure on transparency film. The ion jets were tack sharp as were the stars.

Another factor to consider is that transparency films most all have severe reciprocity failure at these long times. Kodak Portra neg films are used for a great many time exposures as it has better reciprocity characteristics.

Digital sensors really shine for astronomy because they have greater quantum efficiency and do not exhibit reciprocity failure. Any decent SLR of recent manufacture should have a useable ISO of 1600 or better and ought to easily capture auroras at f/2.8, likely with no tracking needed at all.