Author Topic: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!  (Read 263211 times)

Offline bobotheclown

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #480 on: 25 February 2009, 15:20 »
Can anyone explain to me the law of reciprocity and under which circumstances it might fail? :)

Put simply:

In photography and holography, reciprocity refers to the inverse relationship between the intensity and duration of light that determines exposure of light-sensitive material. Within a normal exposure range for film stock, for example, the reciprocity law states that the film reponse will be determined by exposure = intensity × time. Therefore, the same response (for example, the optical density of the developed film) can result from reducing duration and increasing light intensity, and vice versa.

The reciprocal relationship is assumed in most sensitometry, for example when measuring a Hurter and Driffield curve (optical density versus logarithm of total exposure) for a photographic emulsion. Total exposure of the film or sensor, the product of focal-plane illuminance times exposure time, is measured in lux seconds.

For most photographic materials, reciprocity is valid with good accuracy over a range of values of exposure duration, but becomes increasingly inaccurate as we depart from this range: reciprocity failure, reciprocity law failure, or Schwarzschild effect.[1] As the light level decreases out of the reciprocity range, the increase in duration required to produce an exposure becomes higher than the formula states; for instance, at half of the light required for a normal exposure, the duration must be more than doubled for the same result. Multipliers used to correct for this effect are called reciprocity factors (see model below).

During very long exposures, film responds less than usual. Light can be considered to be a stream of discrete photons, and a light-sensitive emulsion is composed of discrete light-sensitive grains, usually silver halide crystals. Each grain must absorb a certain number of photons in order for the light-driven reaction to occur and the latent image to form. In particular, if the surface of the silver halide crystal has a cluster of approximately four or more reduced silver atoms, resulting from absorption of a sufficient number of photons (usually a few dozen photons are required), it is rendered developable. At low light levels, i.e. few photons per unit time, photons impinge upon each grain relatively infrequently; if the four photons required arrive over a long enough interval, the partial change due to the first one or two are not stable enough to survive before enough photons arrive to make a permanent latent image center.

This breakdown in the linear relationship between aperture and shutter speed is known as reciprocity failure. Each different film "emulsion" has a different response to long exposure. Some films are very susceptible to reciprocity failure, and others much less so. Some films that are very light sensitive at normal illumination levels and normal exposure times lose much of their sensitivity at long exposure times, becoming effectively "slow" films for long exposures. Conversely some films that are "slow" under normal exposure duration retain their light sensitivity better at long exposures. Compared at very long exposure times, Kodak's T-Max 100 speed film is faster than the nominally four-times faster Tri-X 400. Most film manufacturers publish reciprocity corrections.

For example, for a given film, if a light meter indicates a required EV of 5 and the photographer sets the aperture to f/11, then ordinarily a 4 second exposure would be required; a reciprocity correction factor of 1.5 would require the exposure to be extended to 6 seconds for the same result. Reciprocity failure generally becomes significant at exposures of longer than about 1 sec and below about 1 ms for film, and above 30 sec for paper.

Reciprocity also breaks down at extremely high levels of illumination with very short exposures. This is concern for scientific and technical photography, but rarely to general photographers, as exposures significantly shorter than a millisecond are only required for subjects such as explosions and particle physics experiments, or when taking high-speed motion pictures with very high shutter speeds (1/10,000 sec or less).

Innit.

Offline bobotheclown

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #481 on: 25 February 2009, 15:21 »
Wiki is your friend

Offline shepgti

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,900
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #482 on: 25 February 2009, 19:03 »
one of my dog looking depressed because the cat got ran over!

« Last Edit: 25 February 2009, 19:05 by shepgti »

Offline Guy

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 6,160
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #483 on: 25 February 2009, 19:08 »
thanks bobo and nick  :smiley:

Offline the_stink

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 4,308
  • A3 140 TDI
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #484 on: 27 February 2009, 07:57 »
Went to a meet last nite with the guys from VAGowners.co.uk nice friendly bunch and got a few snaps










Offline Horney

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 10,802
  • Racing, Trackdays, Starwars.
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #485 on: 28 February 2009, 00:40 »
Nice work Joe! Lovin the contrast on these.

Been out tonight with my mate for some night shots in town:









Full set here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickhorne/sets/72157614522918714/

nick

Offline jamie_pyrite

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 908
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #486 on: 28 February 2009, 12:13 »
Nice photos Stink!

I went to a local meet the other night, was told it would be in an indoor carpark with lighting for some photos, they switched the lights off when we got there! So we went up onto the rooftop of the carpark where they hadn't switched them off (but the lights were VERY yellow!)

I struggled massively to get good shots.. Plus my camera kept freezing while it was saving the long exposure shots.. So I had to take the camera off the tripod to pop the battery out and back in  :rolleyes: very annoying!


Well here's a couple of the ones that came out alright-ish.. I just found it so hard to balance the light against the redness that appeared in long exposures.. I was using an off-camera flash too but it just wasn't doing much..







any tips on improving my night-car photography?

Offline the_stink

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 4,308
  • A3 140 TDI
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #487 on: 28 February 2009, 12:35 »
got some good shots in there, um night time photography is a bit of a pain im just trying out different things with my flash gun at the moment but Nick might ba able to give some pointers  :grin:

Offline Horney

  • 10k hero
  • *
  • Posts: 10,802
  • Racing, Trackdays, Starwars.
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #488 on: 28 February 2009, 13:21 »
The long time saving issue is important Jamie. It's doing it's noise reduction. Essentially it shoots the shot for say 5 secs as you set it and then it shoots the back of the shutter (Black) for the same amount of time. It then uses the two shots to reduce noise.

As for the car park stuff coloured lights are a faf. You know the score with the white balance (shoot something white and use that as a basis for setting it up custome style). Other than that there's not much you can do to combat it. Off camera flash is ace look up the strobist blog as that has loads of useful info.

Nick

Offline Dan34

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,973
  • VTEC Powerzzzz
Re: The Photography Thread, back again by popular demand!
« Reply #489 on: 28 February 2009, 14:08 »
Wow!!! very good pics you lot are all taking, makes me want to buy a better camera

keep it up!  :smiley:

Dan