A few questions about shooting film...

[Forkbeard]

I've been using digital for a while and got quite used to it and it's obviously going to be a lot different to film and I have a couple of questions:

1. White balance is obviously not a thing on film, but are there any filters that are a good idea for film that don't really matter on digital such as skylight filters etc.?

2. Dust and dirt. Is there anywhere on a film camera that you need to look out for dirt and dust building up that will affect performance? Obviously there's no sensor but can dust transfer to film from anywhere? Also if I can see dirt/Dust in the viewfinder is it anywhere that can be seen in the final negative or print other than the lens? I'm guessing not?

3. ISO/ASA. Is it the same thing and can it be changed? Can you say put the camera up to 800 on 200 film for a faster shutter speed?

4. Exposure. I think I remember reading somewhere that film is better slightly overexposed than underexposed and that recovering detail from shadows is harder than from highlights, is that right? And at what stage of the processing is shadows, highlights, contrast etc adjusted in film development or prints?

Thanks for reading. They probably sound like stupid questions to those who know!

 

[MatBin]

1 You still need to white balance, film is designed to work in daylight (or flash) put it under tungsten or flourescent tubes and you'll get a colour cast.
2. Not generally a problem in camera, but dust on negatives/slides is to be avoided if at all possible. If it's in teh viewfinder it isnt a problem on the film.
3. Yes but generally not during the exposure of a single roll of film, that is you rate the film for a given exposure and dont alter it. Having said that film stock is remarkably tolerant and can take 2 stops or thereabouts of incorrect exposure, some films were designed to have a nominal rating and you could expose either side by a couple of stops on the same roll without needing to adjust development times. B&W film can be easily Pushed/pulled, so you could stick 200 in and expose the whole roll at 800, but then you would need to develop the negatives for differently (pushing) or expose at 25 and pull the roll by developing for less time. Grain would be affected by this process and generally colour film didnt like it much, slide film wouldnt tolerate it at all. Again it would be for the whole roll, no mid-roll resetting of the Iso rating (generally).
4. Cant remember, but its the opposite of digital so I guess under rather than over expose.

HTH
Matt

 

[Woodsy]

Hi,

So in answer to your questions:

1) Filters definitely do exist for tweaking the balance of film. While adjusting the white balance of the film itself is not possible, you can of course adjust it later if you're scanning the resulting developed negatives.

2) Not especially. Dust accumulating anywhere is probably not a good thing, so it's best to keep things clean. Dust can of course transfer to the film from anywhere, but each frame is at least clean. If you can see dust in the view finder, the chances are it is on the mirror and/or the prism, and so won't in any way affect the resulting image quality, with the extremely unlikely exception of whether the dust is somehow affecting the AF or light metering sensors. I have never heard of this happening however.

3) The sensitivity of the film is set, and unchangeable. You are completely at liberty to change the ISO setting in the camera, and this will change the resulting recommended exposure values generated from the light meter etc. This will have the effect of under or over exposing the film depending on which way you go. It should be noted that it is also possible to push or pull the film at the development stage. Typically, this is used to either enhance the 'effective' ISO of the film, or affect the dynamic range of the scene you have taken an exposure for, respectively. In the former case, for example, it is possible to shoot say Ilford HP5 at the rated ISO (400) but for lighting reasons or whatever, the scene is under exposed by a few stops. At the development stage it is possible to 'push' the film by over developing an under exposed film, to bring the resulting exposure to the correct value. Doing so does affect the dynamic range of the resulting developed frame(s), and hence pushing and pulling is a technique also. Development is global for the film though, so this is only really viable if the entire film is treated the same.

4) It depends, I believe. As far as I can remember, slide film is better very slightly over exposed to reduce the density of the shadows. It does however blow the highlights very quickly and is largely unrecoverable if strongly blown. Negative film is a different matter as the latitude is so much greater. As for what's best, that's up to the individual.

 

[skysh4rk]

I've been using digital for a while and got quite used to it and it's obviously going to be a lot different to film and I have a couple of questions:

As with any advice on the internet, view all of it with a critical eye (even mine).

4. Cant remember, but its the opposite of digital so I guess under rather than over expose.

For instance, following this advice will result in less-than-optimal exposures in most cases, I would argue. Negative films especially benefit from additional exposure, not less, and underexposure will ordinarily result in muddied colours and lack of shadow detail.

That said, there are times where the effects of underexposure may be desirable and some films (e.g., slide films), may get a saturation boost and the benefit of protected highlights from slight underexposure, so it's not to be avoided completely.

 

[skysh4rk]

1. White balance is obviously not a thing on film, but are there any filters that are a good idea for film that don't really matter on digital such as skylight filters etc.?

White balance is very much a thing with film. I use filters (e.g., 80a, 85b) or specific types of films (e.g., daylight balanced vs tungsten balanced) to control for this if I can. If you do not use filters, I would ordinarily overexpose any daylight-balanced film by two stops in indoor lighting situations to allow the latitude to correct in post, otherwise you will have yellowy, muddied colours.

 

[Forkbeard]

White balance is very much a thing with film.

Sorry, I didn't phrase that very well. I should've said 'WB adjustment is not a thing on film cameras'. I presumed they would be something you needed but I'd only really heard of the skylight filter.

 

[skysh4rk]

Sorry, I didn't phrase that very well. I should've said 'WB adjustment is not a thing on film cameras'. I presumed they would be something you needed but I'd only really heard of the skylight filter.

I'm not quite following your rephrasing here.

You're right that there's no LCD menu option to select white-balance options as there might be with a digital camera, but white balance adjustment is still a thing with a film camera. Some cameras, particularly a number of cine film cameras, have a filter switch built into the camera to make these adjustments (e.g., flicking the filter switch swaps in an 85b filter to correct tungsten film for daylight).

That said, most still film photography cameras—rather than building these colour-balance filters into the camera—leave it to the photographer to choose the appropriate film or external filter at the time of exposure. Personally, I always carry an 80a filter for my cameras to correct tungsten/indoor lighting for daylight-balanced film.

 

[Ste_S]

3) The sensitivity of the film is set, and unchangeable. You are completely at liberty to change the ISO setting in the camera, and this will change the resulting recommended exposure values generated from the light meter etc. This will have the effect of under or over exposing the film depending on which way you go. It should be noted that it is also possible to push or pull the film at the development stage. Typically, this is used to either enhance the 'effective' ISO of the film, or affect the dynamic range of the scene you have taken an exposure for, respectively. In the former case, for example, it is possible to shoot say Ilford HP5 at the rated ISO (400) but for lighting reasons or whatever, the scene is under exposed by a few stops. At the development stage it is possible to 'push' the film by over developing an under exposed film, to bring the resulting exposure to the correct value. Doing so does affect the dynamic range of the resulting developed frame(s), and hence pushing and pulling is a technique also. Development is global for the film though, so this is only really viable if the entire film is treated the same.

Not completely true. Most modern film has a wide exposure latitude and can take 1 stop of under exposure and 2 stops of over exposure without changing development times.
You only really need to adjust development times when pushing B&W or E6 two stops or more.

For instance, following this advice will result in less-than-optimal exposures in most cases, I would argue. Negative films especially benefit from additional exposure, not less, and underexposure will ordinarily result in muddied colours and lack of shadow detail.

Absolutely, I find it hard to blow out highlights on film as happens on digital.

 

[skysh4rk]

Not completely true. Most modern film has a wide exposure latitude and can take 1 stop of under exposure and 2 stops of over exposure without changing development times.
You only really need to adjust development times when pushing B&W or E6 two stops or more.

What isn't true? The sensitivity of the film is undisputedly invariable, although it is possible to push or pull films to compensate. Woodsy hasn't mentioned the tolerance of film, particularly to overexposure, but his comments don't preclude this and he doesn't suggest that film must be pushed/pulled.

 

[Deleted member 49428]

The slanted lens has a video on shooting bridal portraits with film and compares to digital. They use portra 400 and Tri-X 120 film.

 

[Mr Badger]

The above comments have pretty much covered the questions you asked, however, if you're just starting out with film (and with an untested camera too) it's probably best to shoot film at its rated ISO until you've really got the hang of things (perhaps after 10 or so films with consistently acceptable results), otherwise changing the ISO (or trying over or underexposure) is just something else to add to the number of things you could get wrong, and then it will be all the more difficult for you (and/or us!) to work out what went wrong so you can avoid it next time. Hope this is useful.

 

[Peter B]

If your intention is to start shooting colour print film and having it commercially processed, I'd suggest using a 400 iso/asa speed film at box speed. It's worth keeping basic notes at the outset on whether it is cloudy, sunny, dull, etc as you can then see the effect this has on the colours produced. I find Agfa 400 Vista plus really loves the sun, especially for reds and greens, whereas it is less vibrant in duller lighting, but pretty much a reasonable all-rounder at a decent price. Once you have run through a few rolls you can maybe think about trying out different films for comparison.

 

[john.margetts]

If you have a new old camera that has not been used for a long time,be aware that moving the film through the camera generates a small amount of static electricity on the film. This will attract all and any dust inside the camera, resulting in speckled images. I always use the first film to a) test the camera and b) clean the camera. I do not expect any usable images from the first film.

Once you are adept at processing your own b&w film, you can change the ISO setting mid-roll, compensating for this by using stand developing - but generally, no, you cannot change ISO mid-roll.

 

[MatBin]

Once you are adept at processing your own b&w film, you can change the ISO setting mid-roll, compensating for this by using stand developing - but generally, no, you cannot change ISO mid-roll.

What about xp2?

 

[skysh4rk]

What about xp2?

I think people are confusing terms and concepts here.

The ISO of a film is set and does not change for anything at all. The sensitivity of the film is the sensitivity of the film.

That said, you can choose to shoot a film at a different exposure index (EI). For instance, while the rated ISO of XP2 is 400, you can certainly get good results shooting at an EI of 200, 100, or even 50. One way to shoot at these other EI, is to tell your camera the film is slower than it is (e.g., by adjusting ISO setting on your camera). While many people refer to this as adjusting the ISO, you are really manipulating the EI, as the ISO of film is still 400 no matter how you choose to shoot it.

Pushing or pulling film also has absolutely no effect on the film’s ISO.

If one consults Ilford’s technical data for XP2, it will show reference to shooting at different EIs, as described above, rather than ISOs: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file_id/1909/product_id/703/

 

[Forkbeard]

Er...I'm beginning to think I shouldn't have asked

Seriously though, I'm just gonna go out and shoot a roll of film - some indoors with artificial light, some outdoors etc etc. and see what happens, take some notes and then come back to this thread!

 

[Woodsy]

It’s never a bad thing to ask the questions

 

[MatBin]

I think people are confusing terms and concepts here.

The ISO of a film is set and does not change for anything at all. The sensitivity of the film is the sensitivity of the film.

That said, you can choose to shoot a film at a different exposure index (EI). For instance, while the rated ISO of XP2 is 400, you can certainly get good results shooting at an EI of 200, 100, or even 50. One way to shoot at these other EI, is to tell your camera the film is slower than it is (e.g., by adjusting ISO setting on your camera). While many people refer to this as adjusting the ISO, you are really manipulating the EI, as the ISO of film is still 400 no matter how you choose to shoot it.

Pushing or pulling film also has absolutely no effect on the film’s ISO.

If one consults Ilford’s technical data for XP2, it will show reference to shooting at different EIs, as described above, rather than ISOs: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file_id/1909/product_id/703/

Agreed but it's the one film I know of that you can reset the iso dial on your camera mid-roll if you want to, AFAIK no other film is made to work like that or advertised that it's something you can do, I know you can but you run the risk of running out of latitude and getting either some shots over/under exposed if you change the iso dial mid-roll.

 

[skysh4rk]

Agreed but it's the one film I know of that you can reset the iso dial on your camera mid-roll if you want to, AFAIK no other film is made to work like that or advertised that it's something you can do, I know you can but you run the risk of running out of latitude and getting either some shots over/under exposed if you change the iso dial mid-roll.

It's certainly not the only one, because virtually the same advice is explicitly given in the technical specifications for Fuji 400CN, which is a similar C41-process black and white film. As for colour negative, while the technical data sheets often only allude to this capability (e.g., wide exposure latitude), they are also quite similar in practice in many cases to XP2. For instance, I use a range of exposure indices while shooting Fuji 400H (in fact, I regularly shoot it at EI 125 and EI 250 on the same roll to suit conditions).

 

[Ste_S]

Agreed but it's the one film I know of that you can reset the iso dial on your camera mid-roll if you want to, AFAIK no other film is made to work like that or advertised that it's something you can do, I know you can but you run the risk of running out of latitude and getting either some shots over/under exposed if you change the iso dial mid-roll.

I think most C41 and B&W do in a roundabout way ? They talk about latitude which is the same thing.
Ilford just use a marketing gimmick with XP2 (and Fuji Neopan 400CN, they're the same thing). While they say the film can be shot at 100-800ISO, everyone else will say the latitude of the film is +2 to -1.

I don't tend to change ISO. If I'm using a camera with aperture priority, I'll use exposure compensation instead of changing the ISO.
On manual cameras where I'm using a separate meter I'll change the aperture or shutter speed up or down a stop should I need to for the same effect.
Eg If I want f/11 and meter says 1/50sec at 400ISO I might shoot at 1/100 instead if I'm not sure I can hand hold it. It's the equivalent of changing to 800ISO. I know I can do this because the latitude of the film is good for under exposing one stop.

Conversely if I'm shooting a back lit subject I'll meter for the shadows and over exposure 1-2 stops which is essentially the same as shooting a 400ISO film at 100-200ISO. Again I know I can do this because the latitude of the film can take two stops of over exposure.

 

[skysh4rk]

They talk about latitude which is the same thing. Ilford just use a marketing gimmick with XP2

I think that you are right that Ilford have chosen to cleverly market XP2, as similar latitude is offered by a number of other colour negative emulsions.

XP2 (and Fuji Neopan 400CN, they're the same thing)

Well, they are certainly similar, but I'm not necessarily sure that they are exactly the same. For instance, the technical specifications for these films, links to which are provided in my posts above, cite different recommended exposure indices of 50–800 and 100–800 for XP2 and 400CN, respectively. That said, while I can find the characteristic curve and spectral sensitivity data for XP2; Fuji haven't provided anything in this regard for 400CN, which might have allowed us to tease out more specifically how they differ (or if they do, in fact, differ at all).

 

[Ste_S]

@skysh4rk They're both definitely made by Ilford - in 120 format they use the same silver wrapper and backing paper that Ilford uses. I've head mention that it's XP2 made to Fuji specs, but to be honest I've not really noticed a difference between them.

 

[john.margetts]

What about xp2?

I was talking about b&w film - XP2 is a C41 film - essentially colour film - and cannot be stand developed.

To keep Skysh4rk happy, I referred to changing the ISO setting on the camera rather than changing the ISO of the film.

 

[Peter B]

As a possible help to the question of changing iso, there was a Fuji slide film called 100 : 1000 which could be exposed at any iso between 100 and 1000, but that never meant that you could change speed mid-roll.
https://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/AF3-989E.pdf