Absolute density of a C-41 neg doesn't build nearly as quickly as
other film types, which is one of the reasons it has such exposure
latitude. The range of densities *in the film* itself is less than
chrome and conventionally processed B&W negs, but (and here's the
kicker) C-41 film is capable of recording a greater range of subject
luminosities also. More information "compacted" (if you will) into a
shorter space. Which (in theory) makes it a good film for CCD
scanners. So highlight details even in +1 shots taken in direct sun
(except for speculars of course) should exhibit full detail in a good
Personally I agree with Roger Miller about correct exposure, and want
to emphasize that the differences in grain structure vs exposure
increases are going to be pretty subtle except where C-41 film veers
toward underexposure. Think of the manufacture's rating as the
minimum needed to get good full range results. Overexposing by one
stop, even with exact exposure controls, is still a good idea, even
though the gains may be minimal. Actually, in practice I usually
overexpose by only 2/3 stop as I feel most of the quality gain has
accrued by that point. If I need the speed more than the quality
however, I shoot at the rating.
I've yet to shoot and scan Portra, but I've heard it's great stuff.
----- Original Message -----
From: Lynn Allen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 10:21 AM
Subject: filmscanners: Overexposure (was:OT: Film grain
> Dave King" wrote:
> >...it's not really "overexposing" the film to rate it one
> > > to two stops slower than the manufacture's recommendation.
> This might work particularly well in a studio environment, but I'm
> how it would work in direct sunlight. I'm tempted to try it, to get
> shadow definition.
> Certainly, one could expect the grain to be less, but would the
> burned-out highlight details?
> Best regards--LRA
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com