In the golden age of “holiday snaps,” both Kodak and Ilford spent a huge amount of R&D on concocting the perfect “amateur” black and white film. Colour transparency film goes from nearly black at 3 stops underexposed to very pale and lacking detail at two stops over or more. An over exposed negative will have vivid colours, but the brightest parts of the picture, like faces, will have “crushed” tones, often looking just solid white or yellowish and lacking detail. Well, using the example of colour film, an under exposed negative will have muted colours, milky shadows with no detail and show more grain than is usually desirable. What can possible go wrong if you don't use a light meter for photography? But it still offers some latitude for error. Okay, so film isn't as forgiving as digital. And realistically a reshoot just isn't possible 9 times out of 10. Indeed, beyond reshooting, there's not much you can do about fixing any problems if the photos don't come how you were expecting them to. But why is it particularly important to use a light meter for photography with film? Well, aside from the fact that analog photography tends to be less tolerant of sloppy exposure than digital photography, there's also the important fact that you don't get to see the results of film photography until it's too late.
0 kommentar(er)
