Hi--

>I haven't noticed the 1-stop drop in b/w, but that could be for several
>reasons. First, we don't shoot much b/w at the Times anymore (well, once in
>a great while...) and secondly, I routinely set my strobe for 2.5 stops
>under in order to acheive true fill flash and not just flash. The goal with
>fill flash is to bring the shadow areas into an acceptable latitude for the
>film without being noticiable. Of course, like all things, this varies upon
>the conditions encountered.

Yes - but if you want to get scared about "modern" TTL flash camera technology (Nikon), shoot a medium-tone subject ambient-light only, then
with "A" flash only, then (maybe) manual flash only, then TTL flash
only, then TTL with "+1" dialed in (all with all auto modes locked out, exposures/distances adjusted to show only the one exposure type to be checked) - you should find the "+1" TTL setting is the one that will
match exposures with your other B & W frames... (color is correct at
"0"). AT "-2.5", the exposure would actually be -3.5 stops, maybe not
enough to affect the ambient exposure...)

>I'm not argueing your point, just widening the view
>Ron Ombligo

We always try, but some people take it personally, and get
argumentative...;-)
I don't.
David Ruether



>At 04:56 PM 2/3/97 -0500, you wrote:

>>>You are correct on both counts. I was thinking TTL flash. While there was
>>>TTL flash earlier than the N-series, it wasn't technically that great. If
>>>you can ever get a Nikon tech to talk honestly about it, they will say >>>the same. But I do stand corrected.
>>> Ombligo

>>Hmmm, actually, I don't agree with that entirely... The older
>>flash TTL was limited to 400ASA, and didn't (except for the
>>F3) allow for TTL fill-ratios, but it did expose B & W TTL
>>flash correctly, unlike the newer ones that underexpose
>>B & W about one stop...
>>David Ruether