St. Paul Winbter Carnival 1992 Ice Castle
Plaubel Makina, Anticomar 100mm f/2.9
Agfacolor Optima 100, 10 sec, f/2.9
This terminology is self-explanatory;
photography with whatever light is available.
During daylight hours, this is no problem. Difficulties arise when light levels are
quite low. Under such circumstances faster
lenses or higher ISO settings often become a necessity. With film, higher ISO settings generally are
accompanied with coarser grain and ISO 3200 is a limit that is hard to
overcome. Here digital technology offers
considerable advantages with some cameras offering ISO levels of 10 thousand or
even more.
This has created another
performance evaluation besides camera resolution in megapixels. Some individuals are definitely of the
opinion that a camera isn’t worth considering unless it excels at super high
ISO levels. There is definitely an
advantage to be had, but are levels of 10 thousand ISO or more really necessary
or helpful for that matter?
I have been involved in
several discussion about this and thus have come across examples where anything
less than 10 thousand ISO just doesn’t cut it.
My enthusiasm of this is far more measured, but then I don’t photograph
black cats in a coal mine very often.
"Boltergasse" Barntrup, Germany
Linhof Technica 70, Schneider Symmar 100mm f/5.6
Ilford FP-3 10 minute exposure
Lou Bellami, Penumbra Theater, St. Paul, Minnesota
Leica M6, 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M
Ilford XP-2 Super, ISO 800
The beginning of my
photographic education is solidly anchored in the film days. Over the years I have certainly done my share
of available light photography, yet rarely did that necessitate ISO levels
higher than 800 or 1600. As a matter of
fact, I am hard pressed to imagine a photographic situation where anything substantially
higher is necessary, although I should add that the coarse grain of very fast
films is often used as an artistic element.
Children's Day Minneapolis Institute of Arts
Leica Digilux 2, ISO 400
Newton Fork Ranch, Hill City, South Dakota
Leica Digilux 2, ISO 100
Minnesota State Capitol, St. Paul, Minnesota
Canon 5D Mark III, ISO 1600
I have always tried to keep
film grain as small as possible which is the very reason why I used to shoot
quite regularly with film speeds of ISO 25.
Obviously, that is quite limiting.
Combining small grain with a variety of film speeds led me to
chromogenic films, mainly Ilford XP-2 and its successor, the XP-2 Super. Unlike other black and white films, these
have the advantage of offering a relatively wide range of ISO settings without
the need of developing adjustments. I
regularly used the XP-2 and XP-2 Super at ISO ranges from 100 to 800. This would be of no consequence if there were
no apparent difference. However, at
lower sensitivity setting these films display a noticeably finer grain. Since no development adjustments are
necessary, there is the advantage of being able to change the film sensitivity
as needed and take advantage of the finer grain at the lower speeds, all on the
same roll of film.
Office Building Minneapolis, MN
Leica Digilux 2, ISO 100
Brentwood Estate, Alexandria, Minnesota
Leica Digilux 2, ISO 100
Private Japanese Garden, Plymouth, Minnesota
Leica Digilux 2, ISO 100
"Tecco"
former principal violinist St. Paul Chamber Orchestra, St. Paul, Minnesota
Leica R4. 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit-R
Ilford XP-2 Super, ISO 800
Of course such considerations
are of not much consequence with digital cameras. Here we can change sensitivity setting at will, although the greater noise at relatively high settings, which does look
very much like film grain, is something to consider. Thus I still follow my old habit of using
relatively low ISO settings in order to get the most out of my cameras and
lenses. With my digital cameras that
generally is ISO 100 or 200.
Available light photography is
considered by most as photography under relatively low light levels. This naturally can result in fairly slow shutter
speeds unless higher sensitivity settings are utilized. Of course a tripod can be of great help when
slow shutter speeds are necessary, although no tripod can overcome the need for
faster shutter speeds with fast moving subjects. I also consider a tripod very restrictive in
the way I can use a camera. I much
prefer to use my cameras hand held.
Cindy Hillger, Don Shelby
Live Newscast WCCO TV Minneapolis
Leica M6, 50mm f/2 Summicron-M
Ilford XP-2 Super, ISO 800
For that reason I still
employ the old formula that I learned in the film days, to use as the slowest
shutter speed a setting which is the equivalent of the focal length of the
lens. With other words, the slowest
shutter speed that the average person can safely hand hold with a 50mm lens is
1/50 (1/60) sec. Subsequently, 1/250 sec
would be the slowest with a 250mm lens, 1/30 sec with a 28mm etc. This approach has served me well over the
years.
Would higher ISO settings be
of an advantage? Of course! As long as the image quality does not
substantially deteriorate, why not? But
I would not make high ISO capabilities a major factor when deciding on a
camera. As long as my camera equipment
offers good performance at ISO 1600 or 3200, I feel unrestricted.
Finally, I must comment on another
advantage of digital cameras. With
relatively long exposure times, they don’t display reciprocity failure. This is a definite problem with most films
and, unfortunately, it differs from film to film. As a rule of thumb, we can safely assume that
reciprocity failure is of no consequence with exposure times up to one
second. After that the exposure response
is not linear anymore and films require an increase in exposure. Unfortunately, there is little choice than to
consult the reciprocity information that should accompany the film.
Don Stolz
Old Log Theater, Excelsior, Minnesota
Leica M6, 50mm f/2 Summicron
Ilford XP-2 Super, ISO 800
All in all, photography in
low light is no problem, as long as we take the necessary measures to overcome
the problems associated with this.
Digital photography has the added advantage of allowing to experiment
without adding to the cost of film and processing. The results can be outstanding photographs,
much beyond the usual daylight snapshots.
The front of the houses in the foreground of the Boltergasse picture appear to be rather grainy. I didn't think the old Ilford FP-3 was a lot less grainy, especially if one considers that it is from a medium format negative.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately I don't have the negative for this print. It got lost. This image was scanned from a print made on Agfa Portriga Rapid 118 paper. What you see is actually part of the texture of the paper. An interesting side note: During the 10 minute exposure my dad and I (we took this photo together in 1967) used a small flashlight to add some extra light to the facade of the two houses in the foreground by constantly painting with light. The only other illumination was the streetlight in the background which consisted of a 250 watt bulb. During the exposure several people walked in front of the camera, some even giving us advice that such a picture could not be taken without flash, that it was too dark. Fortunately nobody stayed long enough to show up on the negative.
ReplyDeleteIs the Plaubel Makina you took the ice castle/fire works picture with the same camera that was featured in your April 1 spoof? If so, I have to say that is an amazing performance for an old camera like that.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is the same camera. It was made in the 1930s and I agree, it is an amazingly well performing camera considering its age. It is also a good example that uncoated lenses are not necessarily poor performers.
Delete