Greetings! I'm hoping soon to take some photos of our church services in progress (individuals reading, priest at altar, processions, etc.) Some will be during the day in a mixture of daylight and artificial; others in the evening in artificial light only. I've never used tungsten balanced film, but believe it is able to reduce colour casts. The lighting is tungsten, not fluorescent which I understand has its own greenish colour cast.I will not use flash. My camera is an M6 Classic with the 50mm and 35mm F2 Summicrons. So, my questions are: 1. Any advice on which type of film and ISO to use for a) mixed daylight/tungsten b) tungsten light only. 2. What are my chances of success without flash? Will I be wasting my time (and everybody else's)?

Many thanks in anticipation of the customary helpful and courteous replies.

A Happy Christmas to all.

James Harper (UK)

-- Dr James Harper (drjh@btinternet.com), December 19, 2001

Answers

James,

I've had very fair results with Kodak's Kodachrome EPJ 320T, see some samples in this thread. It's a slide film with contained grain and I shot it at the nominal ISO setting of 320. Whether that will be sufficient for your situation only depends on the exact lighting in the church. If you have a chance, go there a day before the service with an *incident* lightmeter. f2.0 @ 1/30 might or might not be sufficient...

Another route is to use a ISO 800 daylight type film and a color correction filter (blueish, a B12 Heliopan for instance) just for the tungsten shots. The downside is, that the filter robs you 1 stop and a half... So you might prefer the other way round, since daylight is usually stronger and more easily allows for the use of a reddish color correction filter (R12) in case the light changes at mid roll. For mixed situations there are basically two alternatives: Either you use an "in betwen" filtering (with the help of either a B6 or a R6, depending on the film) or you just go for your main subject, respectively the main light source, that your eye/ brain has adapted to. If the service is basically lit by artificial sources and spots of daylight just add some effects to the whole picture, you might choose to go for tungsten and except the blueish mood of those daylit areas. The "half way" (R6, B6) might still be the filtering with the most atmosphere, mood, conserving the characteristics of both light sources - warmth for tungsten vs. chill for daylight... It's an artistic choice, too, in the end.

A last note on flash use - are you not going to use the flash for not disturbing the service or for aesthetical reasons? In the latter case you might overcome your doubts by considering color correction of the flash gun (R12) and gently filling in the tungsten @ -1,5 to -2 stops. Happy shooting.

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), December 19, 2001.

James

Yes 320 Ektachrome is OK. "Unsophisticated" and grainy (unlike E100/Provia F etc), but OK. If I were you I would go with a negative film like NHGII (rate at 500 or 640) or Portra 400 or 800, which are pretty good in mixed lighting. Or you could use NPH and rate it at 320. Another idea is simply to use black and white and avoid the color cast issue all together. If you worrying about the amount of light available then I suggest you need the faster films. I doubt you will be wasting your time of you use one of these negative films.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), December 19, 2001.

James:

I suggest you shoot a test roll of any Tungsten slide film prior to your official shoot -- the colors can range from hot to cool, depending on the actual balance of daylight available. A better choice might be one of the 4-layer Fuji print films, as they are *very* tolerant of mixed and variable lighting sources.

Good shooting,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), December 19, 2001.

Have you considered Black & White?

-- Mark A. Johnson (logic@gci.net), December 19, 2001.

The Fuji colour neg. film does very well in mixed lighting situations , I would recommend the 800 speed Superia normally comes close , and a good lab can do wonders. I have never been disappointed with the results .

-- Charles C. Stirk Jr. (ccstirkjr@yahoo.com), December 19, 2001.

Good advice so far. I second the idea of testing the film first. Not all tungsten lights have the same color temp.

Also, you generally won't get an even blending of the tungsten and daylight; instead, different areas will show a different color cast. It can make for an interesting or freaky effect, depending on your taste and the lighting.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), December 19, 2001.

Mike- Do you use a color temperature meter much? Can color temps be "guesstimated" with experience? You do not see color temp discussed much on this forum.

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), December 20, 2001.

James, Hello. When the light intensity is weak and the color temperature is unknown it's best to shoot a test to determine which filter/film combination may work. Many times we don't have control or time to shoot tests.

I'm guessing that's the case for you in this situation. If it has to be transparencies right out of the box I would recommend a couple daylight transparency films from Fuji that have worked well in the condition you described with an 80A or 80B filter. Each of the Provia emulsions responds pretty well to push processing and mixed light.

Other responders have commented on the significant speed loss caused by filter use. That's why I usually pack some fast color negative film (ISO 800)for use in weak light and make slides after editing and scanning the best negatives. The negative films seem to respond better to light that's less than ideal and afford a greater degree of post processing control than transparency film.

Shoot lots whatever you decide to do. JH

-- James Hawker (jhawker@siumed.edu), December 20, 2001.

Hi James. I have used ektachrome 320EPJ pushed one stop to ISO 640, for theater photography, with great results. The film is a bit grainy though.

-- Jonas Vilslev (jonasvilslev@groenjord.dk), December 20, 2001.

James,

For a couple of years I served as the "official photographer" for our church. Our church leaders wanted to document some of our normal and special church services for an upcoming 25th year anniversary and for future "look backs". After reviewing the options, I was concerned about disrupting services because flash would be required as would my moving around during some services.

To prevent misunderstandings, I asked the church pastor to make an announcement from the pulpit as to our purpose and my actions. This helped others understand that I was NOT doing this to interrupt the service nor for my personal benefit. He also indicated that the negatives would be made available to parents/participants as desired for them to obtain personal prints of images in which they or their children appeared.

The experiment was a success. I prepositioned myself in a desirable location before services to minimize moving around and I heard no complaints about the flash. On the contrary, several members were pleased to get pictures of events that they otherwise would not have obtained. The 25th anniversary pictorial review was a hit! Good luck with your pictures. LB

-- Luther Berry (lberrytx@aol.com), December 20, 2001.

"Do you use a color temperature meter much? Can color temps be "guesstimated" with experience?"

Frank, sorry about the delay in responding. I started an answer yesterday, but an unexpected visitor turned up at my door.

I wish I had a color temp. meter, but I can't justify the expense right now. There are situations where it could be quite useful (or even essential).

I can make a rough estimate of how the color temps will look on film, largely based on the kind of light source (eg streetlight, midday sun, late-afternoon sun), but my estimates are far from being accurate enough to properly filter the film to some standard. It's also not hard to estimate the difference between the color temp of different sources when you can compare them side-by-side, but again, it's a rough comparison (eg "more orange" or "more blue," not "500 deg. K cooler).

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), December 21, 2001.

Many thanks to all for the helpful and friendly replies. I will do some tests first with the Superia 800 and see how it goes. It certainly seems the easiest answer.

Best wishes.

-- James Harper (drjh@btinternet.com), December 22, 2001.