"I have had rolls of print film recently in my E#S/28mm in which several
prints were slightly overexposed (1/2 stop), enough to ruin the colour,
"flattening" the print, which I hate."
Modern print films have very wide exposure latitude. Indeed, the
standards for determining film speed specify the absolute _minimum_
exposure that will produce an "acceptable" print. (David Vestal used to
gripe about this all the time, especially with respect to Kodak Tri-X.)
The result is that you have quite a lot of latitude on the side of
overexposure. A half-stop is not enough of an increase to even remotely
begin flattening the highlights.
It sounds as if these prints were simply underexposed when printed.
I might add that my IS-10 underexposes. Negatives consistently look at
bit on the thin side.
>>>>>
I recently built a 4x5 camera and started exposing Polaroid 4x5
materials. I learned something very quickly -- you _must_ point an
incident-light meter _at the camera_. Holding the meter horizontal, even
though it reads the "incident" light, is wrong. It produces inflated
readings and underexposure.
The same rule applies to gray cards -- hold the card so that it faces
the camera.
>>>>>
At the risk of becoming "persona non grata" with Olympus USA, I need to
say that I have not been happy with their service. My original OM-4 went
in three times, and was returned either incompletely repaired, or with
no change at all. I was especially bothered that the techs didn't know
how to judge whether the camera was working properly. That's _bad_.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|