# How to compensate



## oriecat (Aug 26, 2004)

Ok, so I rolled 4 rolls of HP5, but I only have 2 dx coded canisters.  So if I end up needing to use the other two rolls, my stupid Nikon will default to 100 and pull the film.  So would it be best to try and compensate in the camera by underexposing two stops?  Or would it be overexposing?  I still get confused on that...  or change the developing?  Or just leave it as is to see what happens?  Or shoot everything with a red filter to add contrast back that the pulling will lose?


----------



## ksmattfish (Aug 26, 2004)

If you want to expose for ISO 400, but your meter is on ISO 100, underexpose 2 stops from what the meter says.


----------



## oriecat (Aug 26, 2004)

Oh good, I had it right the first time.  Thanks Matt!


----------



## Soulreaver (Aug 28, 2004)

Orie, your camera doesnt allow for setting the iso manually?
My not stupid nikon does   .
That way you dont have to compensate in the meter, as it could get complicated sometimes when you are trying to figure how many stops there are between parts of the picture or which zone it will be in the end.


----------



## oriecat (Sep 1, 2004)

Yeah, my stupid Nikon is older and they removed the feature for some reason for a while I think.  Luckily I didn't end up needing those two rolls, so I didn't have to worry about compensating.  Now I can just use them in my Mamiya/Sekor where I can set the speed.


----------



## terri (Sep 1, 2004)

Welcome back, Orie!   :cheer:   Hope the wedding was nice.   When do we get to see some pics??


----------



## oriecat (Sep 1, 2004)

Thanks babe!   I shot 11 rolls, 7 holga, 4 nikon.  Might take me a while to get developed!  Well 2 are color so I can take them to the lab and see if they come out.  I will never ever use Fuji 120 again in my holga.  Both rolls came out of the cam completely not rolled tight, because the paper is too wide and bunched up! :x  It was really upsetting, I just hope it didn't get ruined or fogged too  much.  I'm going to take those in today.  My feet are pretty sore from walking the city all week, so I don't think I will get any other developing done today.

Edit - the wedding was lovely, short and quick too just like I like em.   It was partially in the jewish tradition, so that was really interesting since I had never seen or heard some of that.  Nice to learn something different.


----------



## terri (Sep 1, 2004)

Damn, thanks for the heads up on the Fuji film in Holga.    :scratch:  Wonder why it acted like that.   

11 rolls, I'm totally jealous, my last few days away were in the rain and I came home with 3 rolls, out of which came 1 B&W and 2 slides passable enough for the Daylab.    :x   

Good luck with it all - can't wait to see!!


----------



## ksmattfish (Sep 1, 2004)

oriecat said:
			
		

> I will never ever use Fuji 120 again in my holga.  Both rolls came out of the cam completely not rolled tight, because the paper is too wide and bunched up!



Do you do anything to increase film tension in your Holga?  Some folks jam a bent piece from the cardboard box the film came in behind the roll to provide more tension.  And there are other more permanent mods you could do.  

Although you may have been lucky in the past with other brands, I don't think this is a Fuji specific problem, as much as part of Holga-ography.


----------



## terri (Sep 1, 2004)

> Although you may have been lucky in the past with other brands, I don't think this is a Fuji specific problem, as much as part of Holga-ography.



Excuse me, young man...but it's pronounced Hol_ga_graphy.   

Please make a note of it.   

 

I've only run TriX 320 and Ilford SFX in mine, with no problems, but I have also heard of that trick to help tension.  Have not had to do it with either of these films, so I probably would have been caught off guard too.


----------



## oriecat (Sep 1, 2004)

No, I don't usually do the paper jamming thing, (I think I tried it once, made it too hard to wind, maybe I used too much...),  and I had never had a problem like this before either.    My arista and ilford always comes out perfectly rolled.  When I rerolled those two rolls by hand, I could see the paper pushing at the edge and bending up, it was just too big.  Oh well, live and learn as they say.


----------



## Soulreaver (Sep 1, 2004)

Congrats on the pics Orie.Its been a while I shot many rolls in one outing.
Sorry about the Holga though.

Terri, that Tri X 320 is the regular 400 or is it really 320?Cant say that I have seen it around.
On the other hand, we made some ISO testing and decided to shoot Trix 400 as 200 or 320, depending on the lighting.Is that what you are talking about?


----------



## terri (Sep 1, 2004)

Soulreaver: the box just calls it Tri X 320....of course putting it in a Holga gives no clue.      But I would agree these film speeds are relative, generally speaking.   I doubt there's a _whole_ lot of difference between the true 400 and this 320, speed-wise.


----------



## ksmattfish (Sep 2, 2004)

Soulreaver said:
			
		

> that Tri X 320 is the regular 400 or is it really 320?Cant say that I have seen it around.



Some Tri-X, usually labeled "Tri-X Professional" (or TXP), is ISO 320 according to the label.  It comes in 35mm and 120 size in roll film.  

Tri-X 400 (or TX) comes in 35mm, and is ISO 400 according to the label.

There are many debates out on the web about what the real difference between the two is.  Some say it's all the same, but according to Kodak tech pubs they have different curves.  Others say that one is an older emulsion.  About the only solid difference that I've been able to nail down is that the "Tri-X Professional" (ISO 320) has a "toothy" emulsion or film base surface for hand re-touching of the actual negative.


----------

