Patrick Cooper Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 Just asking for peoples opinions on how acceptable overexposure looks on Tri-X. Obviously, this is very subjective. Ive never shot Tri-X on super before though I have used Tri-X on 16mm and with that format, I exposed it correctly. Although Tri-X is rated at 200asa for daylight, the cartridge will 'instruct' the super 8 camera to expose it as 160asa which is about half a stop of overexposure. For those that do shoot Tri-X on a semi-regular basis, does this amount of overexposure look okay? I'm guessing that the exposure latitude of this stock must be a little generous. Out of curiosity, has anyone had Tri-X 'pulled' by half a stop during developing? If so, what are the results like? With pull-processing however, there is a reduction in contrast which is no good thing for black and white film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hadfield Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 (edited) I think 200 asa is just 1/3 of a stop higher than 160 asa, not 1/2 of a stop. These are the steps or 1/3 stop increments between 160asa and 320asa. 160asa 1/3 stop to 200asa 2/3 stop to 250asa 3/3 or 1 stop to 320asa Edited June 28, 2013 by Richard Hadfield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Frazer Noakes Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 I have shot loads of Tri-X in super 8 cameras rated at 160asa and the 1/3rd of a stop overexposure is negligible. You will only encounter issues in bright sunlight, but then Tri-X is the wrong stock for that situation anyway - unless you want that effect. I have only had Tri-X "pushed" (more exposure) by half a stop - but this was only on old stock - it does indeed flatten the contrast - but if you are transferring to digital this can be a good thing as a slightly flatter contrast can yield better results when scanned to video - since many telecine lenses add contrast to your already contrasty reversal film images. I just got a roll of 7 year old Tri-X back yesterday - I exposed it as 160asa - wide open at f1,4 and shot at 9fps (for effect) - I had this film pushed by half a stop and it looks great (for what I want anyway). It is always best to shoot a test roll before you shoot any important work. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Cooper Posted June 29, 2013 Author Share Posted June 29, 2013 I think 200 asa is just 1/3 of a stop higher than 160 asa, not 1/2 of a stop. Yea that just shows how bad my maths is. I was recently at an event shooting a mix of Ektachrome 100D and Tri-X. Switching between film stocks, I thought I recall there was about half a stop difference in the light readings - when taking a reading from the same subject (unless my memory is playing tricks on me. ) Camera used was a Canon 1014E. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Frazer Noakes Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Yea that just shows how bad my maths is. I was recently at an event shooting a mix of Ektachrome 100D and Tri-X. Switching between film stocks, I thought I recall there was about half a stop difference in the light readings - when taking a reading from the same subject (unless my memory is playing tricks on me. ) Camera used was a Canon 1014E. Hi Patrick, was my answer of no use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joerg Polzfusz Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Switching between film stocks, I thought I recall there was about half a stop difference in the light readings The difference between E100D and TriX@160ASA is 2/3 stops. Hence your "about half a stop difference" makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now