Isaac wrote:
> Actually, the lab did its job. The prints are supposed to show the
>information on the film. You should have noticed that the frames that
>did not get enough exposure started to look pretty muddy and grainy. If
>you want a print to be printed dark, you have to tell the lab. It is
>still far better to "print down" a properly exposed neg than to work
>with a thin, underexposed neg, so I would never "bracket down" with neg
>film...
You're right, of course. What I was shooting was a fire/police "light-bar"
that was generating its own light at a pulsed rate (not humanly timeable). I
dealt with this problem for several years without finding a good answer. The
best method was to stop the motors, measure the light, turn off the lights,
set up the cameras, turn on the lights, check the problems, turn off the
lights, *fix* the problems, turn on the lights, *shoot* the lights, and to
heck with the motors. ;-)
That's why I "bracketed down," and I'm stickin' to my story! ;-)
Best regards--LRA
>From: Isaac Crawford <isaac@visi.net>
>Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>Subject: filmscanners: bracketing neg film was: Best film for scanning with
>FS 2710
>Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 22:39:24 -0400
>
>Lynn Allen wrote:
> >
> > Uh, this is probably a really dumb question, but what steps would you
>use to
> > get this pushed-film processed, given the technology likely available in
>a
> > small town? The last time I pushed film, I lived in a large metro
>area--I
> > don't presently. At that time, I found that the labs would routinely
>process
> > (neg) frames that had been deliberately been low-bracketed, so that the
> > results from top-bracket to low-bracket were essentially the same. I
> > probably should have pursued this phenomenon, but threw my hands up and
>said
> > "*&%#!", or words to that effect. ;-)
>
> Actually, the lab did its job. The prints are supposed to show the
>information on the film. You should have noticed that the frames that
>did not get enough exposure started to look pretty muddy and grainy. If
>you want a print to be printed dark, you have to tell the lab. It is
>still far better to "print down" a properly exposed neg than to work
>with a thin, underexposed neg, so I would never "bracket down" with neg
>film...
>
>Isaac
> > This sounds like something I'd like to look into, if I can find the
> > resources.
> >
> > Best regards--LRA
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
