Some shots in the station and train Taken before a wedding event, thought they look quite okay. But my wedding shots are kinda bad. Haizz... here goes.
LC-A
plus-x-pan
QUESTION!!! Anyone know of any contrasting B and W 35mm film? As contrast as the X-tri-pan?
Thanks!!
8)
eamesboy- 10-04-2008
Do not know what you mean by contrasting B/W film?
Exposure and developing time plays a key roll too.
Kodak Tri X-pan is a good film for what i know.
Just bought a few to try it out. Will update once I have
the roll developer. Cheers.
sumlom- 10-04-2008
try pushing film. like shoot ur tri-x(shld be asa400 eh?) at 800 den process as 800 film :)
Royale With Cheese- 10-04-2008
Exposure is alittle too much.
Try shooting 2 stops in future
Good try btw :wink:
gilaman- 10-04-2008
i got no idea wad u talking about gary.
seems under too me. and 2 stops up or 2 stops down?
a lot of ppl go for the high contrast look but as mentioned every process actually counts. from film to developing to even scanning.
i think i've found most success with using neopan 400/1600 film, developing normally and scanning at uncle mike.
pushing film by 2 stops is also a good idea, but since most of us dont develop our own film, pushing can be expensive (sometimes 1 stop can be as expensive as $2). also note the subtle and often misunderstood differences between pushing while shooting and push processing.
the former would prob mean shooting a rated 400iso film at 800iso, then processing it as if it were 400 film. most likely resulting in underexposed pictures characterised by a lot of blacks (or shadows if u'd like). some ppl (as i used to) believed that it gave us more contrasty pictures but it really depends on lighting conditions.
the latter would prob mean shooting a rated 400 iso film at 400 iso, then processing it as if it were 800 film. or, u cld shooting a rated 400 iso film at 800 iso, then process it as if it were 800 film. i think this would be the besy way to give u some kick ass grain and lovely contrasts.
woah. i am suck a geek. damn.
hope this was helpful somehow.
Royale With Cheese- 10-04-2008
the former would prob mean shooting a rated 400iso film at 800iso, then processing it as if it were 400 film. most likely resulting in underexposed pictures characterised by a lot of blacks (or shadows if u'd like). some ppl (as i used to) believed that it gave us more contrasty pictures but it really depends on lighting conditions.
Oh yea, U hit the spot! :lol: Something I was trying to say..
The colors look more grey than B&W
fuzk- 10-04-2008
I thank you on behalf of ace monte. I think the explanation is very helpful! :D
asfeexiated- 10-05-2008
Helpful to me too! Btw I think that the second last shot it nice; hhe handle is nicely 'censoring' his eyes.
ace_monte- 10-05-2008
Wah!!! Thanks guys, actually i always wanted to ask about the "push push" thing that always mention in the forum but scare too noob to question.
I guess its not too late to know about this before my australia and lake kenyir trip 2 days from now and next month. :D
Many thanks lah!
erm another question, is there a 35mm tri-x-pan? erm, the 1 i have is plus-x-pan, isit the same?
Forumer™ is Voted #1 Free Forum Hosting provider
Build your own community today with the largest message board hosting company.