Huh? What?
Jedi Master Lind, you shot TMax3200 at EI 1600, meaning that you exposed it
for as if it was 1600 (would have been one stop overexposure if it was rated
at 3200) so why did you PUSH it? The way I remember this stuff, I used to
expose Ektachrome 400 as if it was 800 and get a one stop push (ESP-1,
longer development) which sort-of yielded EI 800. By my understanding, you
exposed it at 1600 (overexposing) but souped it for another one-stop worth
of overdevelopment (relative to the exposure.) Did you mean "Pulled it one
stop to balance the overexposure" or is there a benefit to overexposing by
one stop and then also overdeveloping by one additional stop for available
darkness?
Remembering my Advanced B&W, the overexposure would let you reach into the
shadows at the risk of blowing out the highlights. A shorter development
time would keep the highlights from blowing out, thereby giving you shadow
details without a bad side effect. You would have captured a wider range of
brightness by lowering the contrast.
But you have given overdevelopment which traditionally would push the
highlights into blocked-up territory, wouldn't it? I'm more than curious!
Are TMax 3200 highlights (the dense part of the neg) imperious to
overexposure and overdevelopment, like color negs, giving you markedly lower
contrast?
I have used color materials for low light work so this TMax3200 is new
territory for me. Do you specify which developer/dilution/temperature also?
Details, man!
Lama
From: "John A. Lind" <jlind@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Went to the same location two weeks later for a second attempt at concert
> photography at their monthly "Blues Jam." Shot a roll of TMax 3200 at EI
> 1600 in an OM-2S and processed it Push 1.
< 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 >
|