John Lind wrote a very good commentary about exposure
latitude--one of which I will also add my two-bits.
A super-wide exposure latitude can result in pictures that just
don't quite "arrive". A wide-latitude film might mimick more
closely how our eyes render a scene, but lacks the visual cues
to establish the extremes in exposure.
The brain is constantly adjusting the visual process to
normalize the scene before our very eyes. This is why we fail
to see green florescent lighting--because our image processing
has auto-corrected and is using it as the baseline lighting for
the scene.
When you walk into a room, the eyes and brain have "sampled" the
extremes of tonalities for that room. Whatever we look at in
the room is held in context with those extremes.
A photograph has to, by itself, establish the boundaries of
exposure, colorcast, etc., without benefit of the eye/brain auto
compensation. Think of the four sides of a photographic print
as the walls of a room. Within this room we must establish the
high, low and colorcast values for the "room."
With B&W we establish the exposure boundaries with something
that hits 100% white and 100% black. Doesn't take much--even a
smidge will do. But if it isn't there, the photograph will look
flat, muddy or just plain unappealing. Doesn't matter if it's
accurate or not, without the extreme values the eye/brain cannot
establish exposure context.
Color is similar in that we can establish the exposure
boundaries with solid blacks and whites, but also includes the
ability to establish the boundaries with complementary colors:
Blue/Brown, Purple/Green, etc. If true complementary colors
(color opposites) are not available, we must establish the
boundary with a third color that when mixed with the other two
would result in a neutral shade.
Films with narrow latitudes and/or high saturations tend to make
our job easier in establishing the tonal or color anchors.
Films with wide latitudes, especially in B&W, make it difficult
to produce prints with solid blacks and whites.
Again, this is because of the importance of establishing an
exposure or color context to the photograph. In the case of a
photographic presentation or collection of photographs all taken
as a set, you can often establish the context with a photograph
or two and the rest may use that context. Unfortunately, that
means that a specific photograph cannot stand on its own, but
must remain part of the set.
As a wedding photographer, I use a pretty flat film (Portra NC)
as the prints are almost always used in a "set". The opening
pictures in the album will establish the exposure/tonality
limits of which the rest of the photographs will follow. One
must be careful not to startle the viewer with a change in
boundaries partway through the album.
As a nature/stock photographer, I use a highly saturated film
(Velvia) as the pictures are almost always used on a stand-alone
basis.
As a B&W photographer, I try to use a film that has good
latitude, but not excessive. T400CN is an example of a B&W film
that is too wide. In order to get good clean blacks you must
trash the rest of the picture. After a couple hours of pulling
your hair out working on a print, you'll stick a roll of TMAX in
the enlarger just to clear your head.
AG-Schnozz
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com
< 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 >
|