Don’t ever trust, don’t ever trust the meter, it lies!
Don’t ever trust, don’t ever trust the meter,
When it cries, cries your name…
I’m paraphrasing Queensryche here. But the point is, that even I’m still making exposure mistakes on occasion, and evidently it had to do with it being a particularly overcast day (a rare occurrence in Colorado Springs, I can tell you). Evidently everything I shot during the Pike’s Peak Regional Airshow was underexposed by a stop or so. Not the end of the world, thankfully, as Ferrania P30 seems to just lose contrast when it’s underexposed. At least, under the circumstances where it’s an overcast day, and using a 1940s lens. Here’s the worst offender:
That was at least 2 stops underexposed. Even though underexposed, I was able to pull incredible amounts of detail in scanning, it was just a matter of bumping up the contrast and usually lightening things up a bit. What I couldn’t say is what’s up with all the dust particles and water spots (and I always run my film through the StaticVac right before scanning). I had a roll of Tri-X developed at the same time and there was nothing wrong with that roll at all; I think I will make an entire post out of unfairly comparing the two films.
Here are all the stats for this:
Scanned myself with the Pakon F335, edited in Photoshop
D-76 stock at 8min (I think, or it could have been 9min…it was developed by my local camera store)
Canon 7 with the Leitz 35mm f/3.5 Summaron
Shutter speeds were nominally around 1/125 at f/8 (I was shooting at around ASA100)
The Axis Trio makes its first appearance, here’s a pic:
(Shot with the Spotmatic SPII on Tri-X) – Japanese camera body, German lens, and finally, Italian film!
As far as first impressions go, I wasn’t expecting much at all because John at Cameraworks said they were very underexposed and the negatives were quite thin. I don’t know how to describe what I mean, but looking at the curve I provided, the picture was there right in the middle, where with something like Tri-X all that information would have been way to one side where it’s much less usable, and usually is a lot grainier. And this film certainly has some fine grain!
I shot that 35mm Summaron at f/8 all day and it looks incredibly soft, compared to my beloved Takumars (this is really the first time I’ve put it through its paces), which threw me for a while. Having had a couple weeks to think it over and studying the rest of my scans, I think I might be dealing with a focus error here. Is P30 a different thickness from most other films? I’m going to rescan all the negatives when I have a chance, and make sure I run the autofocus wizard using this particular film. I assume that I will also have to run it again to refocus it to all the other films I use. Again, nothing wrong with that roll of Tri-X I scanned at the same time.
I’m hoping that the dust/water spots were just so noticeable because of the underexposure.