Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I think if you had given more exposure to the man on the left the one on the right would have been overexposed. Good compromise, I think - ---------- >From: "Eric" <ericm@pobox.com> >To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >Subject: [Leica] Re: PAW - Week 7 - SlideOne >Date: Mon, Mar 4, 2002, 4:16 PM > > John: > >>http://slideone.com/PAW2002/week07.02.html >> >>http://slideone.com/PAW2002/week07alt.02.html > > I like the composition of your alternate better. The parts of cars in the > main one take away from the image for me. > >>Both Neopan 1600 shot w/ an M. I still cant seem to get enough shadow in the >>alt shot. I exposed a stop over what the handheld meter told me and did 1:3 >>processing in Xtol. Will be trying out Delta 3200 at the next game maybe >>with their DDX developer... I wonder if I'm expecting to much out of the >>fast film...? > > I'd suggest staying with Neopan 1600 for a little while. Stick with one > film and experiment with it until you learn how to use it. If you switch > films one week, developers another week, and metering technique the third > week, you'll have a hard time learning. > > By handheld meter, are you talking about a reflective or incidence meter? > Which M do you have? If you want to make sure you have shadow detail, you > need to meter your shadows. Use a reflective meter. Meter a shadow that > you want to have just a little detail. Open up 3 stops. Or 2 stops if you > want it to have more detail. Better yet, try both. Make sure you're only > reading the light reflected from the shadow area. > > What kind of meter did you use, and how did you use it? Where did you point > it? What did it say? What did you set on your camera? > > > Eric > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html