SW flash fluorescent tube and pale faces

Rudolphono · 2010-05-21T08:02:02+00:00

Hi. Möchte für eine Hochzeit ein paar Einwegkameras mit SW-Filmen bestücken. Der Festsaal wird vermutlich mit Leuchtstoffröhren oder Gasentladungslampen be...

Rudolphono

Hi. I’d like to load a few disposable cameras with black-and-white film for a wedding. The reception hall will probably be lit by fluorescent tubes or gas discharge lamps. The flash is around 5500 K. Is there any point in using a colour correction filter for black-and-white photos? Does it make sense to use a yellow/orange filter to achieve a more flattering skin tone? Because that would also increase the contrast. I don’t want the faces to look even paler than the flash already makes them. Thanks in advance for your help. Regards, Ralph

michael-kielgmxnet

Hi Ralph, With disposable cameras, fitting filters is likely to be tricky. I wouldn’t use reddish or yellowish filters, as these tend to reduce contrast in portraits; if anything, a very light green filter would be better. However, this will also emphasise skin blemishes.

CPD

Hello!

With disposable cameras, fitting a filter is likely to be tricky.

Not necessarily. You can cut gelatine filters into small pieces and attach them to the front of the lens with tape. (I do this occasionally too, although in my case the filter goes on the back of the interchangeable lens) With black and white, I’d still leave it out, though. The chalk-white faces have more to do with the frontal flash alignment – which is unavoidable with such cameras – than with the colour temperature. I’d rather recommend a film like Ilford XP 2, which smooths out quite a few things, or a two-bath developer with an uncomplicated film like HP 5+ or similar. The residue will then have to be ‘manipulated’ as best as possible during post-processing. Ciao! CP

Urnes

Hi Ralph, I’d soften the flash a bit. You know, with some white foil or a tissue. Something like that. The overexposure on faces is partly due to the way light reflects off fair skin. Why not just try out a few different versions? Regards, Sven.

Wolf_XL

...come on, let’s be realistic – we’re talking about disposable cameras... For one thing, you’ll struggle to fit any other type of film in them, and for another, they definitely don’t have automatic exposure or any other way of adjusting the exposure to different ISO sensitivities or additional filter factors... Not to mention any adjustments to the flash...

Rudolphono

...come on, take it easy – we’re talking about disposable cameras... For one thing, they’re hardly ever compatible with other types of film

It depends on the disposable camera, but with a removable film compartment it’s usually no big deal. It depends on the model.

And secondly, they definitely won’t have automatic exposure or any other way of adjusting the exposure to different ISO sensitivities or additional filter factors...

Almost right. They have no correction, so you have to adapt the film to the conditions on site and the filters.

Not to mention any fiddling with the flash...

Well, anything you can tinker with externally, like ND or correction filters. Apparently there was a time when people used to take proper photos even without TTL and autofocus. Those mad dogs used to work with flash powder and all sorts of crazy stuff. Sounds odd, but it’s true. Regards, Ralle

Wolf_XL

...do you really think the result justifies the effort? It’s true that there are people who can take decent photos even without autofocus or automatic exposure – I actually reckon I’m one of them (I got my first camera in 1963...) – but what do you expect from a fixed-focus clunker that’s being handled by complete amateurs (I assume you want to leave these things lying around on the tables for anyone to use)?? And if changing the film really is as easy as you say, why don’t you give it a go? Practice makes perfect... ;-)

Rudolphono

What do you expect from a fixed-focus bottle-bottom camera that’s being operated by complete amateurs?

I expect photos taken by complete amateurs with a cheap bottle-bottom camera. I don’t want to modify the cameras to the point where they produce perfect photos. Which, of course, isn’t possible anyway. I just want to make them look a bit better and see what I can get out of a camera like that. The effort involved is less important to me. What counts is simply giving it a go. If people enjoy taking the photos and the bride and groom are happy with them in the end, the whole thing was a complete success. It doesn’t matter if one or two pictures are a bit out of focus or incorrectly exposed. The demand for technically perfect pictures is secondary here. Regards, Ralle

Wolf_XL

...I’d leave these shots as they are – there isn’t much room for improvement anyway, and colour negative film is much more forgiving when it comes to exposure latitude... You can always scan the best shots afterwards and edit them or convert them to black and white. In my opinion, that gives you the most flexibility...

CPD

Hello, Hand each guest a pinch of flash powder... :) Joking aside: you can stick a tiny piece of gold foil to the centre of the flash (you’ll have to experiment to see how big it needs to be, but it’s only a few millimetres?). That is really positive for people’s faces. On the other hand, you shouldn’t expect too much in terms of technical quality from the equipment available. But in my opinion, that’s not what matters in this case. Ciao! CP

Rudolphono

Hi. I always thought that black-and-white films had the widest exposure latitude. That’s why I had the idea of using a different film in the first place. Regards, Ralle

CPD

Hi Ralle, Well, sort of! You definitely have a very wide exposure latitude with chromogenic black-and-white films (Ilford XP 2+ or Kodak T 400 CN). But you can also get a usable image (admittedly a flexible term) with colour negative film during overexposure. I used to expose CN films from Aldi or chemists without a second thought, which resulted in a strong colour boost. If I were you, I’d stick with black and white, but use one of the chromogenic films mentioned above – if you can manage to fit the film into a disposable camera. I’m not really up on that sort of thing. Bye! CP

Rudolphono

Unfortunately, I’m almost out of chromogenic film for 35mm. I’ve been reading quite a bit lately about the wide exposure latitude. I suppose I really must start looking for a cheap supplier. Thanks for the tip. Regards, Ralle

cfb_de

Since this is a wedding, it *might* *just* be possible to get one of the well-known manufacturers to produce a special batch of around 100–200 disposable cameras loaded with XP-2 or 400CN. Why not just ask? After all, there are only two in Germany that meet the criteria. Best regards, Franz

CPD

Unfortunately, I’m almost out of chromogenic film for 35mm.

Hi, As far as I know, Ilford XP2+ (and perhaps 400 CN too?) is also available by the metre. That would make it cheaper. But I still don’t understand how you intend to get the film into the camera. Above all: there’s already one in there. What are you going to do with that one? Bye! CP

Rudolphono

The film is on a reel and is wound into a standard 35mm film canister as you advance it. So just open up the camera, wind any film onto the reel using a film-loading bag, and pop it back in. Who exactly are these well-known ‘Konfektion’ people? Regards, Ralle

cfb_de

Who exactly are these well-known manufacturers?

One of them runs this forum :) Another (who also sells disposable cameras) is based near Hamburg. You can request quotes from these two companies; the actual assembly takes place elsewhere. Best regards, Franz