Digital Experiment on FE Roadtrip

[radar]

When I took part in the FE Roadtrip, I also took my dslr and p&S to take an "equivalent" photo and see how they compare. Not having done film for a long time, I had to do some reading up as I wanted to do a long exposure and with this, I had to apply reciprocity failure. So I looked up what it was for Tri-X film and then went to the beach.

I used a tripod for each photo. I had the Nikon FE with 35mm lens set at f/16 with 1.5s(approx.) and my two cameras, a Nikon D200 and my Canon G10. I used a 20mm lens on the D200 set at f/16 1/3s and the G10 was set to 35mm equiv, f/8 and 2/3s. Setting the G10 to the same settings is not easy, so that's what I picked


Nikon FE


Nikon D200


Canon G10

The digital versions have been taken in raw and converted with Bibble Pro using the Andy B&W plugin. The settings for the B&W conversion was Kodak Tri-X film on Agfa paper. There is an option for developper, but not sure what Patrick used.

In hindsight, I would probably have liked to have the film exposed a bit longer but considering my inexperience with film, I was still happy with the results.

Link to the FE Roadtrip thread where you can find all the photos from the other participants in the roadtrip.

Hope you find the comparison interesting.

Cheers,

André

[Mr Darcy]

Interesting, but Puzzling Andre.
What ISOs were used.
If you matched ISO to film (not sure what Tri-X is), then I would have expected the D200 to be a much darker exposure than the film. as shutter speed was 5x faster, and all else equal. The reverse actually happened. From your numbers, the G10 should be similar to the D200 which it is. But why is the FE so dark? I like it best actually, but...

[radar]

Greg,

good question, ISO on the D200 was set to 400. The G10 was set to 80, forgot to up it to 400. The rating on the Tri-X is 400 as well.

At the beginning, all I wanted was the D200 and the FE to have pretty similar settings and other then the shutter speed, slower on FE, the rest were pretty close. The 20mm lens on a DX body was closest I had to the 35mm on the FE as I didn't want to use a zoom on the D200. White balance was set to cloudy. It was only on an afterthought that I took the G10 with me. I forgot to set the ISO for the G10

Shutter speed needed to be slower on the FE due to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocity_failurereciprocity failure for the film. It was a guess on my part that the FE's shutter was 1.5s and that's what I remember, could be wrong, memory is distant now. Just can't find any exif on that filum stuff. Wrote it down at the time but can't find the piece of paper

I was also wondering why the FE and D200 were so different, just put it down to me miscalculating the exposure for the FE.

Clear as mud?

André

[Reschsmooth]

That is very interesting. Yes, Tri-X is generally rated at 400, and this is what the ISO dial on the FE was set at. That said, that is irrelevant if you didn't rely on the camera's TTL meter.

Actually, I believe the FE shutter speed was about 2 and a bit times faster.

I also like the FE version better as well.

For the record, I developed the film in Kodak HC-110 for 8 minutes at 20'.

[aim54x]

I have to agree, the Tri-X version is nicer even with the increase in grain. It is rather strange how smooth digital is in comparison.

[CraigVTR]

I agree that the FE shot is much is much better, it conveys a richer moodier scene.

[radar]

Certainly makes for an interesting experiment. I also really like the moodiness of the FE version. Someone that is good at B&W conversions may be able to obtain as similar result as what the FE looks like, I'm just not that good at it.

Cheers,

André