Re: [APML]: Exposure confusion- HELP!

[a5817394@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Rob Roy)]

>>Not sure if this can be resolved.  I shot half a roll of Ektachrome P1600
>>(my very first astrophotos) and impatiently cut off the piece and took it in
>>for dev.  I told them it was shot at 1600, but afterwards, no one could tell
>>me whether it was pushed x2 as per instructions to get 1600, or not.  So I
>>don't know whether it was done at 400 or 1600.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>When you say f/3.5 do you mean REALLY f/3.5 (which is 2/3 of a stop slower
>than 2.8, or do you mean f/3 and a half... one half stop click between f/2.8
>and f/4, which is a half stop. Lots of people (me included) sometimes say
>3.5 when we mean 3.4 and yes, I'm quibbling here... :-)

The lens is a 21mm f3.5 and I used it wide open.

>I shot some P1600 last year in Arizona, very dark skies.
>
>Cygnus to Cepheus Milky Way
>35mm lens f/2.8, 24 min, black sky background but what I'd call slightly
>underexposed (but I usually go to sky fog limit and the sky isn't black then).
>
>My film was developed at EI 400.
>
>My best guess is your film WAS developed at 1,600.
>
>Here is a simple way to find out. What did they charge you for developing
>the roll? You probably paid extra for the push.

There was no extra charge.  When I asked about it, the girl said, "Maybe
they did push, but didn't charge."  So that didn't get me anywhere.  This is
obviously my first and last roll at that place!

After writing the original HELP!, I thought of going to M.C.'s
'Astrophotography' and looking at the Moon exposure tables in appendix B.
>From those I think they did it at 400?  

Thanks for the reply, Jerry.

Rob