Topic: Film Latitude

[Late Developer]

Generally speaking, it's probably true to say that print film has greater exposure latitude than slide film.  From what I can gather, slide film has latitude of 5-6 stops and print film has 2-3 more.  However, is there a definitive guide (or table) that shows which film(s) offer the greatest to the lowest exposure latitude?  Also, some film responds better than others to over-exposure and others to under-exposure.

I appreciate this is a big subject but I'd be really interested to know if there's a definitive guide that provides such a list / information.

[Mab]

Tim Parkin at onlandscape did a good amount of film testing here (http://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2010/12/a-colour-film-comparison/). Unfortunately he didn't test the new Portra 400 but I've seen him posting a separate test somewhere (can't locate it right now). I remember him stating that unlike any other film he had tested before the new Portra 400 offers more latitude than his quite extensive testing method was capable of measuring.

[Francois]

The latitude is actually written in the DX code on the cassettes. You just need to know how to decipher it.
http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=1100.0

[imagesfrugales]

This question can not be answered with a few words. But as a rule of thumb you can epect that transparency film can display about 6 stops of subject contrast and negative film up to 10 stops or even more. It also depends on the development and if the negs shall be enlarged as  analogue silverprints or if they shall be scanned. Scanning is most versatile and you can easily capture a subject contrast up to 14 stops with many films, f.e. Acros100, some other bw films or most color neg films.

Always keep in mind that there is a huge difference between subject and negative contrast. Subject contrast is given, negative contrast can be adjusted by development, yes, also with color neg film.

For better understanding some basic knowledge of densitometry is helpful to understand the manufactureres data sheets with the corresponding curves. Understanding the zone system also helps a lot, even if you don't use it for your practical photography at all.

Sorry that there is no easier answer possible.

Best - Reinhold

PS: for the most kind of photography it's not so important. Use negativfilm and you are on the safe side for most subjects. Billions of great shots were made without thinking about that.

[imagesfrugales]

PPS: good old Kodak provides a nice essay on the subject

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_acrobat_en_motion_newsletters_filmEss_06_Characteristics_of_Film.pdf

[LT]

further to Reinholds post ... film is amazing at recording a huge range of light difference (I have seen people claim 14 stops or more of useable detailed range) ... the limiting factor was always the paper used to print it on, which can only really show the 5-6 stops worth of full detail. This could be dealt with using various developers, tan and stain for long tonal ranges etc.

But with scanners and photoshop this is much less of an issue than is has ever been. I say dont worry about it, just shoot the stuff, develop it as best you can then enjoy making something nice out of the neg. The tech details just dont really matter like they used to do.



 

[imagesfrugales]

Hi Leon, sorry that I have to object and it's most important not to mix up subject contrast and negative or paper contrast.

Paper has a tonal range 5 or 6 stops, but that has nothing to do with the 14 stops of subject contrast, that a negative can display within its own lower range of negative contrast. That's the sense f.e. of the zone system, to bring home even highest subject contrasts properly on the negative and then on paper within their own ranges without loosing tonal information, f.e. without burnt lights or blocked shadows. And vice versa, make full tonal range prints from low subject contrasts.

And yes, scanning is the most versatile method, but maybe not the most satisfying for everyone.

[LT]

Reinhold. You are making the exact same point that I am I think you have misunderstood my post. We agree. Nothing for you to object to.

[imagesfrugales]

the limiting factor was always the paper used to print it on, which can only really show the 5-6 stops worth of full detail.

Yes, I obviously misinterpreted this sentance. Thank you for the clarification and sorry for any confusion.

[Late Developer]

Thanks one and all.

The "onlandscape" link from Mab was interesting. As per my initial post I'm fully aware of the relative limitations of slide versus negative film.  However, it doesn't seem as if there's an obvious and accessible piece of work posted on the interweb that provides a list of relative latitudes for a wide variety of films shot under controlled environments and in optimal conditions.  I suppose, given that we seldom shoot in optimal conditions, we have to make do with what we have in our bag wherever we happen to be.

I'm guilty, as many of us are, of being promiscuous when it comes to choice of film.  However, I know I really like the results I get from Ilford XP2 Super, Fuji Provia 100f and Kodak Portra (160 and 400).  As I intend to start developing my own black and white, I will probably switch mono stock to something I can process myself (and save some money / have fun into the bargain) but I'm not really sure what.  I should probably follow Leon's example and shoot Ilford FP4 / HP5.

Anyway, thanks again.

Paul.

[Urban Hafner]

Oh no! Paul do you know what you've done? You asked for advice on what film stock to use. You have opened the flood gates

FYI, you actually can develop XP2 with black and white developers.

[Late Developer]

Oh no! Paul do you know what you've done? You asked for advice on what film stock to use. You have opened the flood gates

FYI, you actually can develop XP2 with black and white developers.

I made statements, Urban. Rhetorical questions.  Where are the question marks "??" ?? 

[KevinAllan]

Generally speaking, it's probably true to say that print film has greater exposure latitude than slide film.  From what I can gather, slide film has latitude of 5-6 stops and print film has 2-3 more.

I think you'd be lucky to get 6 stops from slide film; two stops either side of the midtone, i.e 5 stops in total, is more likely.

Since new Portra came out, 90% of my colour images have been on portra and recently I was tempted by nostalgia to buy some more Velvia and Provia 400X; time had erased my memory of just how limited the dynamic range of slide film is and I'll probably go back to Portra apart from 6 rolls of slide film still left.

When you have a clear light/dark dividing line following the horizon, of course you can use graduated filters to make things easily, but when you have a waterfall meandering through the scene and dark rocks either side then grads aren't going to help.

Having said that, when I eyeball the transparencies there seems to be detail in the shadows than I see on the scans from an Epson v700 - if you happen to have a drum scanner then that's going to help get the most out of slides.

[Late Developer]

Hi Kevin.

I'd love a drum scanner but I'll have to make do with my V750.  The best scans I get are with Portra 160 and 400 and also with XP2 Super.  That's probably because I've sort of got used to them and my experience / knowledge of scanning isn't that great anyway.

I try to use my Lee filters wherever possible as I much prefer to get it right in camera as far as the situation allows.

All of that said, I love projected slides (especially 6x6) despite their limitations.

[KevinAllan]

Hi Kevin.
...
All of that said, I love projected slides (especially 6x6) despite their limitations.

One of my nostalgic reasons for trying out slides again is that I was given an old 6 * 6 projector which takes two slides at a time and I wanted to try it out, just for occasional use. As a side effect it produces so much heat I could turn the central heating off when it's in use !

[Late Developer]

Yep. Got one of those!! I also reckon it's going to set fire
 To my screen or etch the photo onto my living room wall. Still love it though!!

[Francois]

When they don't have a grounding wire, I get more worried about electrocuting myself than anything... especially if the wiring is dry.