Both shot on Lomography Color Negative 800 (EI 800, meter readings differ by 2-stops).
Color negative film in 120 format shot at 6×6.
Hasselblad 2000FCW + Hasselblad Planar F 80mm f/2.8.
Check out Lomography CN 800 vs Kodak Portra 800 vs Fuji Natura 1600 (day and night) in my blind film test.
This is a sample from my personal photographic archive, posted as one of over a thousand examples of my photography here on EMULSIVE. While occasionally pretty to look at, these photographs mostly serve to show some of what’s possible with film photography.
For additional information or prints, please get in touch.
~ EM
Share your knowledge, story or project
The transfer of knowledge across the film photography community is the heart of EMULSIVE. You can add your support by contributing your thoughts, work, experiences and ideas to inspire the hundreds of thousands of people who read these pages each month. Check out the submission guide here.
If you like what you're reading you can also help this passion project by heading over to the EMULSIVE Patreon page and contributing as little as a dollar a month. There's also print and apparel over at Society 6, currently showcasing over two dozen t-shirt designs and over a dozen unique photographs available for purchase.
About the author
Related reading
So what’s the difference between these 2 shots? Did you meter them differently and, if so, how? Or did you take your initial meter reading and purposely underexpose the second shot by 2 stops? I’m curious because, at least to my untrained eye, the highlights in the background don’t really look that different to me. Thanks.
Isn’t that what’s supposed to happen?
“Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights.”