On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:59:57 +1000, Deen Hameed <deenhameed@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote/replied to: > AA's suggestions of exposing for the shadows is for negative film (print for the highlights), and even that is meant to be taken in conjunction with developing the film specifically for the exposure.. > Well, there may be detail in the negative film that you can scan out, but you sure can't print out anything that's overexposed much. I shot some portraits of the wife a while back and was shocked that the highlights were just gone. It was on negative film and the lighting had been high contrast sunlight with shadow. Those highlights might have been scanable with two scans but I doubt it. Negative film has it limits for sure, and those limits are way less than some people talk about. I would suggest using negative film as if it was slide film and not assuming you can retrieve a huge range density from the neg. When something's blown out, it's density increases dramatically. I've also found that even when you can get back a bit of highlight with negative film, that the quality of it is poor - grainy and off colour at times, with no real value except to say, 'ya, there's some detail there'... But hell, the chances that I'll ever see another roll of negative film are slim, indeed. Now if I can just find some place to permanently store all these negs and slides.... -- Jim Davis, Nature Photography: http://jimdavis.oberro.com/ Motorcycle Relay Kits: http://www.easternbeaver.com/
