RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

I've got that laid by as my go to method when I move my film images (or be realistic, part of them) to digital. Now you've made a good start. What you wrote about on this post could also be beneficial. Anyway, I enjoy your posts.

delder Loc: Maryland

I was just gifted a "Kodak Timer" [NO Part or Model #, JUST Kodak Timer]
A previous owner had made a paper ring around the dial callibrated 1 to 10 in a slightly exponential scale.
I am wondering if this was a callibration for polycontrast paper?

frangeo Loc: Texas

A Kodak tech told me that if I shot Kodachrome at 80 ASA ( ISO today ), rather than 100 ASA that they would be much better. I did and "WOW". Did that for years.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Most pros working with 'chromes of all types knew that rule of thumb — to increase ASA/ISO by 1/3 stop to get some extra saturation.

Occasionally, though, a batch of film would be 1/3 stop too slow or too fast, and you would have to adjust. And if your camera meter was "off" a bit, you set a different ISO, as well.

I tested each batch of film I ordered. We usually bought Ektachrome 50 type B, Ektachrome 400, and both Ektachrome SO-366 and Ektachrome 5071 slide duplicating films in 100' rolls, and spooled our own 36 exp. cartridges. We tested each roll with a ring-around of a Q-13 21-step gray scale and color patches, to determine speed and filtration for 3200K, Daylight, Flash, and Cool White Fluorescent light sources. That process minimized waste, which could be an expensive nuisance in an AV lab!

It was quite common to rate those films as 1/3 stop faster than box speed, but occasionally we got a batch that was 1/3 stop SLOWER than box speed. Color balance often varied by 0.10 CC away from neutral in any direction on the color wheel. (0.1 CC density is about 1/3 stop). That meant we used Kodak Wratten Color Correction gels over the camera lens to correct the difference between two batches of film.

delder Loc: Maryland

Thank you so much for real world insight into the nuts & bolts of film photography on a professional scale.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I've found that almost everything in the film/optical photography world has an equivalent parallel in digital photography.

Both slides and JPEGs require "pre-processing" — using a combination of tools and techniques at the camera, prior to exposure, to get the most quality out of the camera.

Both color negatives and raw digital files have far more latitude than slides or JPEGs. Rather dramatic things can be done after photography to adjust the resulting images.

Combining film scanning of some sort with digital post-processing gives you some of the best of both worlds, although I would argue that few instances exist where a film original is worth the hassle. Large format applications are often exceptions, since there are resolution advantages and the advantages of swings and tilts on view cameras. But if you don't need swings, tilts, or more than 100 MP resolution, the four main interchangeable lens camera formats (medium format, full frame, APS-C or DX, and Micro 4/3), can suffice where film once did. Knowledge and proper tools are keys to great results.

delder Loc: Maryland

GREAT historical prespective on the Art & Craft of Photography.