Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Rangefinder Forum > Technique: How To Shoot It

Technique: How To Shoot It Ask questions about how to take pics, as well as share your own favorite shooting tips.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Utter reciprocity confusion
Old 09-06-2011   #1
nephilim
Registered User
 
nephilim is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 59
Utter reciprocity confusion

Going to take some long exposures in a few weeks but I've never done this with film before. So I went to the Kodak website and had a look at the data sheets for 400TX, TMX, TMY and the Portras. The first confusing moment was when I digest the TriX sheet which says

indicated 1s -> add 1 stop -> 2s (fine)
indicated 10s -> add 2 stops -> 50s (? isn't it 10s *2 *2 = 40s?)
indicated 100s -> add 3 stops -> 1200s (??? 100s * 2 * 2 * 2 = 800s)

On the other hand, the TMAX 100 & 400 sheet are comprehensible.

Next I found Gainer's method (http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/1...sbehavior.html) which adds to the confusion.

According to Kodak:
400TX @ 10s -> 50s
TMX @ 10s -> 15s
TMY @ 10s -> 15s

and

400TX @ 100s -> 1200s
TMX @ 100s -> 200s
TMY @ 100s -> 300s

According to Gainer, the corrected exposure is a function of the coefficient tc,1 only. These are

400TX: 0.169
TMX: 0.069
TMY: 0.061

Using this formula (Tcorr = Tmeasured + tc,1*(Tmeasured^1.62)), 400TX @ 100s should be 400s, which seems to be very low. Moreover, TMX has a greater tc,1 than TMY and therefore a shorter corrected exposure. This completely contradicts Kodak's sheets, both at 10s and 100s.

Please tell me, I'm stupid and made a terrible mistake.

Cheers,
Torsten
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #2
Chris101
Lytro Shooter
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,647
Torsten, since you have a few weeks before you take the actual pictures, I'd suggest that you do some testing, and determine the actual exposure by experiment rather than relying on conflicting theoretical numbers.
__________________
101-365
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #3
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 3,845
Never heard of the "gainer method" before - but I am somewhat sceptical regarding an attempt to reduce such a complex multi-factorial phenomenon as real world film reciprocity (there must be dozens of substances with each their own reciprocity factor in a modern film) to one single factor. The tables published by Kodak et.al., which usually are measurement results, are far more complex than that.

When stating actual times, the makers will probably use the data from their measurements rather than coarse rule-of-thumb multiplication factors, so that approximate factors and sample times will differ. In any case, be aware that the data sheet only provides starting values for your own trials.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #4
nephilim
Registered User
 
nephilim is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 59
Some explanation: The Gainer method is a fit of data gathered from a bunch of experiments with different films by Howard Bond back in the first half of 2000. Both data and fit were published in Photo Techniques magazine. Apparently, all b&w films behave in a similar way and allow for this seemingly simple fitting formula. A guy at apug.org did a comparison with another film database for astrophotography purpose and Gainer's formula again agreed very well. Hence, I hoped I wouldn't need to do the experiments but rely on the results of others

However, one thing that came to my mind that might explain one of the discrepancies above is, that the emulsion nowadays is TMX-2. I hope I can find the sheet of the old TMX somewhere... And honestly, the difference in seconds might sound large but in terms of stops it's not that large.

UPDATE - Ok, found the old TMX with identical exposures as the new TMX-2. Interestingly, PlusX has identical numbers and plots as TriX. I'm wondering if Kodak updates these info for each film.

Last edited by nephilim : 09-06-2011 at 02:23.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #5
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,357
Kodak and presumably other manufacturers wanted to be as accurate as possible to keep their customers happy. You should be able to use their data as a starting point.

But as Chris101 said, you need to experiment for yourself. Your personal preferences as well as the accuracy of your photo gear will need to be accounted for, and only experimenting can do that for you.
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=50'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #6
Elektrojänis
Registered User
 
Elektrojänis's Avatar
 
Elektrojänis is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by nephilim View Post
Going to take some long exposures in a few weeks but I've never done this with film before. So I went to the Kodak website and had a look at the data sheets for 400TX, TMX, TMY and the Portras. The first confusing moment was when I digest the TriX sheet which says

indicated 1s -> add 1 stop -> 2s (fine)
indicated 10s -> add 2 stops -> 50s (? isn't it 10s *2 *2 = 40s?)
indicated 100s -> add 3 stops -> 1200s (??? 100s * 2 * 2 * 2 = 800s)
Hmmm... I thought they usually mean (and sometimes it is written on the datasheets too) that you should open up the lens given amount of stops for the given amount of time. This is because if you make the exposure longer the reciprocity failure will get worse even if you make it longer because of the reciprocity failure. By keeping the time constant, it is a simpler equation.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #7
nephilim
Registered User
 
nephilim is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 59
The Kodak material says to either adjust by n stops OR use the increased exposure time.

I tend to use the formula as starting point, bracket in the field (including the recommendations from the Kodak sheets) and make notes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #8
ronnies
Registered User
 
ronnies is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elektrojänis View Post
Hmmm... I thought they usually mean (and sometimes it is written on the datasheets too) that you should open up the lens given amount of stops for the given amount of time. This is because if you make the exposure longer the reciprocity failure will get worse even if you make it longer because of the reciprocity failure. By keeping the time constant, it is a simpler equation.
Making the exposure longer does not compound the reciprocity failure (I believe).

Ronnie
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #9
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 5,921
I find this guy the best for my work. The last chart is the one to use, even he says the first part of the article is a little heavy.

http://www.phototechmag.com/index.ph...ve/reciprocity
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #10
nephilim
Registered User
 
nephilim is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 59
Thanks for the link. That's exactly the data, Gainer used for the formula posted above. And it also sorts out the discrepancy with TriX.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #11
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 5,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by nephilim View Post
Thanks for the link. That's exactly the data, Gainer used for the formula posted above. And it also sorts out the discrepancy with TriX.
I heard an interview with a Kodak engineer discussing TMY-2. He stated that the only thing to change from the old TMY was a perfection/reduction in grain size. He didn't say that reciprocity would be different but I 'feel' it is the same. Gainer's formula was just too much for me so I copied Bond's chart and take it with me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #12
nephilim
Registered User
 
nephilim is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 59
I got a free calculator app for my android phone and saved the formula for each film I use. I hope my long exposure sessions won't last longer than the phone's battery ;-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #13
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 5,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by nephilim View Post
I got a free calculator app for my android phone and saved the formula for each film I use. I hope my long exposure sessions won't last longer than the phone's battery ;-)
Neat, maybe I'll get a cellular telephone someday.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #14
Peter^
Registered User
 
Peter^'s Avatar
 
Peter^ is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 775
Quote:
Neat, maybe I'll get a cellular telephone someday.
can never find the dials on those damn things
__________________
- Peter
----------------
Zeiss Ikon, Olympus OM-1n, Konica C35, NEX-7

See my pictures at:
http://peter.andrews.ipernity.com

“Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-06-2011   #15
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 5,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter^ View Post
can never find the dials on those damn things
Do they make one (?), that's what I want; to replace this, my old phone; which I gave to my daughter (I shouldn't have: a couple of years ago when I updated to a Princess):


Last edited by charjohncarter : 09-06-2011 at 17:36.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 15:35.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.