I'm not sure you're correct about solarisation. The reversal of tone found in solarisation is due to overexposure, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solarizatio

I'm not sure you're correct about solarisation. The reversal of tone found in solarisation is due to overexposure, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solarization_(photography) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solarization_(photography) Solarisation would be a likely outcome of a too slow shutter when photographing the nuclear explosion on typical film stocks without sufficient filtering. It was at least as important to achieve sub-millisecond shutter speed as it was to properly expose the film. One thing that does typically affect film, either with too short or too long exposures is reciprocity failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocity_(photography)#Reciprocity_failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocity_(photography)#Reci... so perhaps that's what you're thinking of. It's hard to know how relevant that is to this discussion. I'm not sure it was a consideration given how energetic a nuclear explosion is, and reciprocity failure is found when there are not enough photons to convert the silver halides into a latent image. I think you're on the right track with Sunny 16, but why not use this method to take photos of the sun itself? I've seen 16 stops recommended as the minimum for solar filtering, so that puts it in the range of standard ISO and f-stops, but without filtering, a high shutter speed like with the Kerr cell is possible.