>>4453803
>There's so much potential there if there was just more contrast to work with
Call it artistic faggotry but I wanted to make it look like a shadow so actually I'm quite happy with the exposure despite what the other pixelpickers say. I'm only disappointed by the strange lines and artefacts.
>>4453810
Meh all the pics were like that with the lines and the saturation fucked so I guess the lab fucked up or maybe the stock was expired, my spot meter works pretty well and it's the only time this happened
>>4453821
>but if it was a single sheet or the most important shot in the whole roll you could have pulled the film to reduce highlight density.
Yeah but I'm traveling so I don't have a lab
>Basically you always want to expose for shadows
Hard disagree, my favourite snapshit of mine is picrel and the shadow adds something I think, same as the fishing guy, you can't see the face. Idk that's just my taste