truls
Lifetime Member
Posts: 568
|
Post by truls on Jan 7, 2015 15:55:26 GMT -5
Using a light meter can often confuse, more than solve the correct exposure. At least for me. When I opened a fresh Kodak Ultramax 400 film, they still had the exposure chart based on sunny 16. Here it is: Based on this simple chart, one could get a very good exposure value without a light meter, and even add similar situations in the same simple manner to memorize. My experience, when using a light meter, I relatively often get slighly wrong exposure. It could be I evaluate the metered area wrong. So, Learning to read the light without a light meter has its own benefit. One are able to evaluate the scene more exact than the meter, also Learning more of photography, composition and light.
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jan 7, 2015 18:30:24 GMT -5
Reliance on a meter is a big mistake. The ones around now may not be as accurate as they once were. Sunny 16 any day of the week for me. Its free, reliable and always works. I astounded an old guy last year when looking at his collection of old cameras he proudly showed me a pre-war Weston meter that was "as accurate as the day it was bought". I looked out of the window and estimated with ASA 100 it is 1/125 at f8 or an EV of 13, the meter showed 1/125 at f2.8 (EV10). We double checked it with his Canon digital. I was bang on the money - ok the canon wanted 1/140th at f8. Here are some sunny 16 shots in different weather. All on Agfa Vista 200 Altix V, light overcast. 1/250 f8 Fujica 35, dull, raining 1/125 f8 Braun Paxette, seriously dull and rainy. 1/60 f5.6
|
|
hansz
Lifetime Member
Hans
Posts: 697
|
Post by hansz on Jan 8, 2015 3:25:59 GMT -5
Years ago I suffered from a disease: meter madness... I even bought (collected:-) a special camera to satisfy my addiction; an Olympus OM4. Up to 8 spot metings, averaging them all for the correct exposure! Wow! Did it make better shots? Eh, no... It effectively take out the fun of making pictures: after I (and the OM4) were satisfied with the exposure, the photographic moment was gone... In the end I sold the Oly - completely dissatified with it, but it cured me from the MM.
To be true, I always carry a meter, mostly for reflected light metering, and forgetting the thing when action is required. After so much years the correct exposure is somewhere in my brains - like Phil said - I honestly don't know why such an exposure will do, no deliberately sunny-16 here, but it works. Automagically:-)
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jan 8, 2015 15:34:38 GMT -5
I always have a meter with me in case of tricky situations. An app on my smartphone. But rarely use it.
|
|
truls
Lifetime Member
Posts: 568
|
Post by truls on Jan 9, 2015 3:27:29 GMT -5
I always have a meter with me in case of tricky situations. An app on my smartphone. But rarely use it. I fully agree With Your epinions, it means I am not alone in this matter. Nice shots Phil! How accurate is the iphone meter? I have read phone meters Depends on a very good camera lens in-phone. Phones With bad cameras read the light more inaccurate? Yes, using a light meter is not wrong, but more attention should be taken when evaluating the scene, giving a better exposure.
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jan 9, 2015 15:59:16 GMT -5
I use Light Meter Free for my Samsung Galaxy S4 mini. Your phone must have a light sensor. It matches my NEX and Nikon meters exactly. Reflective and Incident readings and a zoom function for semi spot readings. meter free app
|
|
|
Post by rickoleson on Jan 19, 2015 6:28:22 GMT -5
Back in the early 1980s when I got my first Minox, I could not bring myself to carry a meter 4 times the size of the camera; so I combined the Sunny 16 rule with some additional rules-of-thumb from film exposure guides and my own experience and came up with this credit-card-size slide rule exposure calculator: It's not very pretty, it's really old ... I probably ought to do a fresh one and put it up as a PDF file. But other people have made better-looking variations on it since, so I've never felt motivated to clean up the original. It does work though, I've hardly ever carried a meter once I got it figured out.
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jan 19, 2015 18:56:40 GMT -5
Back in the early 1980s when I got my first Minox, I could not bring myself to carry a meter 4 times the size of the camera; so I combined the Sunny 16 rule with some additional rules-of-thumb from film exposure guides and my own experience and came up with this credit-card-size slide rule exposure calculator: It's not very pretty, it's really old ... I probably ought to do a fresh one and put it up as a PDF file. But other people have made better-looking variations on it since, so I've never felt motivated to clean up the original. It does work though, I've hardly ever carried a meter once I got it figured out. I downloaded one of these that had been remade. I cut out the aperture then laminated it all including the sliding bit. Then glued it all together. Its pretty robust and works a treat.
|
|
|
Post by genazzano on Jan 20, 2015 5:54:13 GMT -5
It seems that I have lost many habits over the decades. As a poor student, I got a job as a stringer for UPI. The primary task was to cover the Buffalo Bills' games at the old War Memorial Stadium. At the time I could only afford a used Pentax H1a and used Weston V meter. In practice, holding on to the railing of the narrow catwalk suspended 75 feet over the crowd in high wind, snow, and other sports photographers knocking and pushing me about, I don't recall ever using the meter. Fear of failure, I suppose, forced me to calibrate my eye to a 400 ASA and soon use of a meter was viewed as a weakness. Same for AF later on. Today it seems I must always meter carefully and I have lost that intuitive meter in my head. However, I still don't understand why AF is so damn important that we need 51 point AF that cannot take more than a few mseconds, but that's another thread.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Jan 20, 2015 11:31:53 GMT -5
The biggest problem with Sunny 16 or the advice slips from Kodak, is the determination of sunshine, and allowing for Winter light.
Bright sunshine is determined by the shadows definition, and you must add exposure for the season.
Personally I use the "it's always 125/f8 rule", and work around it for ASA allowance, and seasonal adjustment for outdoor shots. With 125 asa B/W 125/8 works well, exposing for shadow detail. F16 may under expose a bit. Colour slide was different, it was better underexposed a bit overall, especially Kodachrome 25.
With digital just bracket the shots on vital shots, some camera's do it as a function.
It can be an issue with older cameras that stop at 125th max, you have to resort to minimum apertures due to higher film speeds these days or use neutral density filters for colour, or strong red for black and white.
Stephen
|
|
|
Post by rickoleson on Jan 20, 2015 15:31:47 GMT -5
When I was 10, my Dad gave me a Voigtlander Vito and a roll of Kodachrome II (ASA 25), and one piece of advice: "F/8 at a hundredth". Amazing how often that worked out just fine. As with so many other things, technology led us to overthink things and (with the active help of the advertising agencies) come to believe that usable results just COULDN't be gotten without the latest technological widget. Multi-zone metering was one of my favorites: Did people REALLY believe that somehow a multi-zone meter could make one square millimeter of the negative expose for shadow and another expose for sunlight on the same frame? Actually, yes, I think many of them did.
|
|
truls
Lifetime Member
Posts: 568
|
Post by truls on Jan 21, 2015 5:30:48 GMT -5
Great advice from Stephen and Rick! As genazzano states, it's all about developing a sense of detecting the existing light Level. I think I will use EV evaluation for this. EV 16 to EV 11 is plain sunny 16 (Bright sun on sand to subject in deep shadow). Then, memorizing EV 10 to EV 6 is not so hard, mileage may vary of course. But one can try to visualize in the head similar situations to remember the light Levels. Some test shots may help, and later the experience also will get good exposures. After all, photography is Reading light.
|
|
truls
Lifetime Member
Posts: 568
|
Post by truls on Jan 21, 2015 5:45:05 GMT -5
When shooting film some error in exposure is tolerated, some films are more generous in this respect. Here a Fomapan 400 test shot, image to left is correct exposed, image to right is underexposed by two steps. Almost no difference other than more Depth of Field. The negative was some thinner, about one grade when printing in darkroom.
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jan 21, 2015 10:40:18 GMT -5
Truls, a good illustration there. Rick, I agree with the multi point meters. All they did was average everything out and film latitude took care of the rest. I too believe that some people thought different parts of the negatives were exposed differently. It could be possible now with digital, but I dont know if its actually being done (yet).
EV is a great system. I can think in EV. If I need to calculate, I use EV10 as my base: 1/60th f4 with 100 ASA film.
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Feb 16, 2015 16:19:43 GMT -5
Back in the early 1980s when I got my first Minox, I could not bring myself to carry a meter 4 times the size of the camera; so I combined the Sunny 16 rule with some additional rules-of-thumb from film exposure guides and my own experience and came up with this credit-card-size slide rule exposure calculator: It's not very pretty, it's really old ... I probably ought to do a fresh one and put it up as a PDF file. But other people have made better-looking variations on it since, so I've never felt motivated to clean up the original. It does work though, I've hardly ever carried a meter once I got it figured out. I found the re-made one. Yours is mentioned on the page as being the inspiration. link
here's a photo of mine made up. I cut it all out then laminated it before folding. It fits in the back of my wallet and the Leica case has a handy pocket too. I made a simplified version tailored to my sister's Lubitel 166.
|
|