Timeline for How to choose the correct exposure for flower photography?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 7, 2019 at 21:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhotos/status/1137102171793690625 | ||
| Jun 7, 2019 at 17:01 | answer | added | J.Hirsch | timeline score: -1 | |
| May 19, 2019 at 12:43 | history | edited | trequartista | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 87 characters in body
|
| May 18, 2019 at 2:31 | comment | added | MCMastery | I understand these photos are poor quality but for some reason I really like them lol | |
| May 17, 2019 at 19:57 | comment | added | StackOverthrow | If you don't have a loupe and a light table, hold the negatives up to the sky. Can you see detail in the flowers that didn't make it into the prints? | |
| May 17, 2019 at 17:54 | answer | added | purduephotog | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 17, 2019 at 17:49 | comment | added | OnBreak. | @Tetsujin all labs will develop "as is" unless you specifically ask to pull or push (as that usually costs extra!). The scan and print, though, is typically done by machine and exposure compensation or color balance mistakes do happen...(like applying auto-levels to every image). | |
| May 17, 2019 at 17:45 | answer | added | OnBreak. | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 17, 2019 at 16:36 | answer | added | TheLuckless | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 17, 2019 at 15:34 | comment | added | Tetsujin | I recall, back from my long-ago foray into actual film, that you could ask the lab to develop "as is" & make no adjustments. | |
| May 17, 2019 at 14:57 | comment | added | trequartista | I know nothing about the developing and scanning processes. But many good film photographer in my town believe in the labs, so I choose to let the lab process. | |
| May 17, 2019 at 14:54 | comment | added | J... | @Knumber10 Do you have any tools to examine the negatives yourself? Do you feel the lab did a good job printing them? (ie: how confident are you that the overexposure happened on the negative?) | |
| May 17, 2019 at 14:52 | comment | added | trequartista | I've edited. These are negative films developed and scanned by some labs near my home. | |
| May 17, 2019 at 14:51 | history | edited | trequartista | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 92 characters in body
|
| May 17, 2019 at 14:50 | comment | added | J... | If these are prints, who developed the negatives? If it wasn't you, and it wasn't a lab you have unwavering confidence in, it could be that your negs are fine. | |
| May 17, 2019 at 14:29 | history | became hot network question | |||
| May 17, 2019 at 14:23 | history | edited | OnBreak. |
edited tags
|
|
| May 17, 2019 at 14:09 | answer | added | Phil Anderson | timeline score: 6 | |
| May 17, 2019 at 13:13 | history | edited | osullic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| May 17, 2019 at 13:13 | comment | added | xiota | Are these scans of the print, scans of the negative, scans done by a lab ... ? | |
| May 17, 2019 at 13:12 | history | edited | osullic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
question is about exposure not aperture per se
|
| May 17, 2019 at 13:12 | comment | added | mattdm | What film are you using? | |
| May 17, 2019 at 11:31 | comment | added | Tetsujin | They all feel as though they're focussed slightly behind the main subject to me, so perhaps it's not entirely the exposure. | |
| May 17, 2019 at 9:00 | answer | added | timvrhn | timeline score: 9 | |
| May 17, 2019 at 7:51 | history | edited | trequartista | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 181 characters in body
|
| May 17, 2019 at 7:50 | review | First posts | |||
| May 17, 2019 at 14:22 | |||||
| May 17, 2019 at 7:45 | history | asked | trequartista | CC BY-SA 4.0 |