Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,475   Posts: 1,542,611   Online: 969
      
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 65
  1. #1
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,726
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19

    A Primer on Incident Metering.

    Why do we meter?

    Simply put, film that is accurately exposed makes makes printing easier and humans are not really that good at assigning accurate EV numbers to all the scenes we see. So the primary goal of metering is to "reliably" find a camera setting that will allow us to easily get our desired print. (It is not about making pretty negatives, it's about making pretty positives.)

    Sure in a front lit sunny 16 situation we can do okay, but when the subject is backlit, when the sun is setting, when we move indoors, when the light source is a camp fire, or when the clouds roll in; we can normally benefit from a little help.

    A second, and optional goal, is to get a contrast measurement so that we can make well considered film development choices that will make our printing even easier.

    That's basically the whole enchilada.

    A few definitions.

    Incident light is "the light that is falling on the scene". This can be from the sun, house lights, open sky, reflections off the snow, or anything else that is throwing light at our subject.

    Reflected light is simply "the light reflecting off our subjects that our eyes and cameras see".

    E.I. is exposure index, it is a personal setting. This is often improperly referred to as film speed, it is not. It is just a number we use to tell our meter how we want things done given all the variables involved.

    The ISO film speed rating, aka box speed, is found through standardized testing. Film manufacturers do this for us. If we get good at following the manufacturer's instructions for normal, we can come very close to getting the same results they do. I normally use this number as my E.I.

    EV is exposure value. In common terms, it's how bright the scene is. More properly this is a measure of luminance.

    Luminance is a photometric measure of luminous intensity, how much light.

    Brightness is an attribute of visual perception in which a source appears to be radiating or reflecting light.

    Three concepts to help understand metering and meters and help dispel some myths:

    1-"A given amount of incident light, falling on a subject of a given reflectance, produces a given amount of reflected light."

    For any given E.I. incident light meters know how much incident light it takes to make a middle tone subject fall as a middle tone on the film.

    For any given E.I. reflective light meters know how much reflected light it takes to make a middle tone subject fall as a middle tone on the film.

    That is a fancy way of saying that both types of metering are fully capable of getting us to the exact same camera setting in any situation.

    2-"Our meters have absolutely no clue about what they are being pointed at."

    Here is where incident metering and reflective metering differ most in practical use.

    Reflective metering is truly handy because many times the meter is built into the camera so there is nothing extra to carry and with spot meters we can pick specific subjects/targets to meter from quite a distance.

    For incident and reflective meters to get us the same camera setting reliably though, the reflective meter needs a target in the scene with a known offset to the proper camera setting. We don't always have or put a known target in our scenes, more typically we just pick a random target and make judgements/guesses about the characteristics of what the meter is seeing. That introduces the distinct possibility of human error. With experience this issue is minimized, but still reflective metering is normally subjective.

    Incident meters are stand alone tools, so it is an extra piece of kit that adds weight, costs money, needs a free hand, and an extra pocket or a strap to keep them handy. Their big advantage though is that they don't need a target in the scene and they provide an objective reading. They don't get fooled by the reflectivity of any given subject. Snow, lots of bright clouds in the sky, dark clothing, water, reflections, blah, blah, blah... none of these will fool an incident meter because incident meters don't see the scene, they see/measure the light falling on the scene.

    3-"When we know the placement of one point in the scene, we essentially know where the rest will fall."

    If we know from testing that there is a specific offset that is common in our shots, like a 2 stop difference between the proper camera setting and the shadows with good texture, or 1 stop difference between say Caucasian skin and the proper camera setting, then by measuring either of these, we can know the placement of the other. Technically it makes no difference which point we measure.

    This is why if we are familiar with our tools, even when we use different techniques and methods, we can regularly end up with equivalent camera settings.

    A few words about E.I.

    Your own E.I. is simply a reference point. You can change that reference to any value you please for any reason you please. If it works for you, its fine for you; that doesn't mean other people's numbers will help you though, or that your numbers will help them.

    If you think you need or want to use an E.I. different from the box rating, do some testing, make sure it solves your problems. Encourage others who want to mimic you to test too.

    I say this because every E.I. is a subjective choice. Your preferences of subject matter, camera equipment, metering methods, lighting situations, lens filters, printing process, paper choices, and your artistic biases all effect the E.I. you choose.

    Testing need not be formal. If in your normal shooting and printing you find that shadow detail is lacking adjust your E.I. to add a little more exposure. If you consistently have more shadow detail than you want you can adjust your E.I. to reduce exposure a bit. Just make sure you are solving real problems.

    Contrast rate.

    For clarity here I'm going to deal with and assume that contrast rate decisions are made before the camera settings are chosen. I also want you to understand why and when film contrast needs adjustment.

    First, you need to answer this question before adjusting the film contrast. "Will it matter?"

    If, unlike Ansel Adams, your plan is to use modern variable contrast papers to adjust print contrast or your lab will be printing for you digitally, then I strongly suggest that you stick to making normal contrast negatives and skip film contrast adjustments unless you find a real problem.

    But, if like Ansel Adams, you are specifically targeting a grade 2 fixed contrast paper and you are testing your work all the way to that paper, then film development changes are important.

    Be honest with yourself here, because if you don't test clear to the paper, you are just guessing. I played this guessing game before I had my enlarger, before I started printing. My negatives from my "guessing period" are very hard to print compared to the "normal" contrast negatives I make today.

    Okay, so if you decide that it matters and you need to adjust film contrast, what is important in taking an exposure contrast measurement is finding out how far and which way contrast is different from your normal.

    With an incident meter this is regularly found by getting one reading with the meter pointed at the light source and another pointed at the camera. Practice and testing are important here. You need to know what normal is and you need to see how changes effect your various subjects before these measurements become meaningful.

    The basic reason for adjusting film contrast is to make printing easier. As with adjusting E.I., adjusting contrast is subjective.

    It's also important to understand that changes in film development do not significantly change how much info the film captures nor the real speed of the film, your exposure choice is the biggest factor in how much and what range of detail the film captures, bar none. Plus or minus development, simply changes what "straight prints" onto a "specific grade of paper".

    Being able to burn and dodge to print more detail is the proof that negatives normally have "extra" info available outside the "straight print" range.

    Reliability and why normal matters.

    I have found that without exception the manufacturer's of my photographic kit, including meters, cameras, chemicals, films, papers, and everything else have really done a wonderful job. Their products typically work exactly as described and even though it may seem like magic seeing the film come out off the reel with images or when watching a print come up in the developer, it really is a well proven industrial process.

    If I want a given output, I simply need to apply the proper input.

    In any industrial process knowing what normal is and understanding how to get there, is important. Yes, I really believe that film exposure, development, and printing are mature industrial processes. Most of us are using off-the-shelf products and or well proven recipes. Within these constraints; given inputs, beget given outputs, with no surprises. The real wild cards in the system are you and I; our failings or successes in the application and understanding of the various inputs determine the quality of our results.

    For me choosing to use an incident meter and to follow the manufacturer's instructions for shooting and processing my film has proven incredibly reliable. Those two choices remove most of the human fallibility and unfounded mythos that surround exposure, film choice, development, and printing. Those choices have provided me a baseline that has allowed for huge improvements in my prints and my understanding of photography.

    So, why do I want to be normal? Because normal means getting reliable high quality repeatable results. I like that.

    So lets talk about what is your incident meter sees?

    Incident readings are typically suggested to be "taken at the subjects nose with the dome pointed at the camera". In certain situations, like for a studio or window light portrait, metering at the subject's nose is important because the subject's relationship to the light source makes a big difference. Outside though we just need to be in the same general light as the subject, not at the subject.

    Incident meters normally have two "modes", dome in and dome out. That choice controls it's angle of view.

    Dome out mimics 3-D subject matter, it sees and measures all the light coming from all the directions that may have an effect on the subject being recorded on our film.

    Dome in readings are meant to see the light that will effect flat subjects, like art, and or used isolate the effect of different light sources. For example with contrast readings and in duplexing which are meant to measure the effect of two different light sources. (More on duplexing in a moment.) The main light in the scene, which for a window portrait would be the window and the secondary light coming from behind the camera, which might be house lighting. Outside this could be the sun as main light and open sky or the reflection from a building behind the camera as the secondary light.

    Camera setting

    So, as I said above, the normal way to use an incident meter for 3D subjects is dome out, at the subjects nose, pointed at the camera. If the meter has been set with the proper E.I. taking a reading in this orientation for use with most negative films will provide an exposure setting that will give you a really nice general purpose negative that can make a very nice print where the subjects will look normal with a nice amount of shadow and highlight detail.

    I honestly believe that most of us could do just fine using this metering technique alone for the rest of our lives. It is that good, that simple, and that reliable.

    Adding artistic biases.

    Typically when we decide to take a photo it is because something in that scene got our attention. We saw something we thought was important to remember or share. This is where the concepts of pegging exposure and place-and-fall become important, we need to get what we saw on the film.

    Pegging comes in three basic types; shadow, mid-tone, and highlight. When we peg we are simply picking one of the three as the most important point for that shot.

    Place-and-fall is the concept that the camera can only place or peg one luminance point, the rest of the scene "falls" relative to that peg.

    For example, if there are faces in the scene I will peg my exposure to the mid-tones because for me faces are always the anchor subject for the print and they need to be placed where they look best, the rest of the subjects in the scene are allowed to fall where they may.

    For landscape photographers the shadow point is the typical peg and the rest of the scene is allowed to fall.

    It is easy to bias our meter readings to accommodate different pegging choices for each shot by simply changing the direction we point the head of the meter. The motivation can be technical or artistic, it makes no difference.

    If you want to give shadow detail more importance and you are willing to compromise highlight detail just turn the head away from the light source some, if highlights are more important turn the head more toward the light source. This is like using salt, adjust to your taste, with experience you can find out how much works best for you.

    Certain situations require very accurate exposure to fit a scene onto our film. This is very typical of slide film. It can also be a concern where we wish to minimize exposure or with very long scale scenes on negatives.

    One technique that can help here is called duplexing. The motivation here is normally that you have competing priorities and a limited amount of room on film. In this type of situation we set the meter "dome in", measure two peg points and average the readings.

    For slide film typically the readings would be taken, one pointed at the light source (to protect the highlights) and the other pointed at the camera (to protect the mid tones). This technique works in all situations but is most useful in high contrast situations where the subject is backlit significantly.

    There's more than one way to skin a cat..

    Meters of all types simply provide exposure suggestions. Just because incident meters are really good at giving you the camera setting as a direct reading doesn't mean that's the only way to use it.

    If your subject is in sun and you are in open shade, or vice versa, and you can't get into the same light, you can simply apply an offset as you would with a spot meter reading. Sure this is a bit subjective but the world isn't perfect and its much better than just guessing.

    Use your imagination and you can find simple ways to make any meter do what you need.

    I could go on but I might never finish that way.

    Please comment and provide your techniques and ideas. If there's something here that doesn't make sense, ask about it so we can figure it out.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Ana´s Nin

  2. #11
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,726
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Garyh I completely agree that reflective metering can be a great tool but not that it can be more accurate, equal sure but not more.

    What I will say is that each method requires a different mindset.

    Reflective spot metering allows us to tie a very specific point in the scene, typically the shadow point for a landscaper, to a very specific point on the the film curve. Measuring that specific point that one wants to tie to the film is mentally a strong connection, it feels emotionally tangible. The reality is though that picking the point in the scene to measure is purely subjective and arbitrary.

    Incident metering requires that we ask ourselves, when we look at a scene, do we want more or less shadow detail than normal?

    Both approaches can get us to the same camera setting.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Ana´s Nin

  3. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,158
    Good point regarding slide film Gary. I use only black and white film and hence I defer to those like you with the experience to comment on metering when using color film.

    I completely agree that incident metering when taking landscapes can be difficult. Such difficulties arise, IMO, mainly when one tries to interpret the highlights. Small changes in meter placement can affect the SBR range significantly and result in a negative that can be either too low or too high in contrast. However, those who use VC paper have some means to rectify metering errors that are not off the charts. Of course, as we all know, shadow details must be on the negative for such to appear in the print. See below.

    Mark-good comments. IMO, incident reading of shadow values are easily defined by simply placing the meter in the shadows where you want detail to be recorded. Subjects deeper in the shadows will of course show no detail. To obtain more detail further in the shadows? Simply move the meter deeper into the darker areas. The entire incident metering procedure has been well detailed by Phil Davis in his book.

    I also agree that one should feel comfortable using both reflected and incident meter readings. As you both you and Mark infer, there are situation where one method might be "better" than the other.

    Yes Andreas...testing materials is the "hard stuff", but the results make the rest of the process easier. However, testing for BTZS methods is rather easily and inexpensively done. This is not the forum to comment on film testing services. Feel free to PM me if you need more details.
    Last edited by Mahler_one; 02-27-2013 at 11:05 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #13
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,726
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Actually Elliot, two things, pegging to and understanding the highlights is quite easy with an incident meter and exposure placement changes do not change the SBR.

    When we use an incident meter pointed directly at the light source, we get a reading that protects the highlights nicely. This is a direct objective measurement of the real luminance involved, it can be expressed as a real number that our industrial photographic process equation understands.

    To put this into to practical terms, think front lit subject matter mid afternoon on a beautiful sunny day, the perfect "Sunny 16" situation. The utility of this measurement is well proven. Given a tested E.I. is being used, there is no question about whether or not the incident meter pointed at the light source in that situation will provide good technical placement, it will be right period. The only wild card here is if the photographer has calibrated him or herself to the system and any artistic bias.

    Life is rarely that simple though. If our subject is in that situation but their face is turned away from the sun say 120 degrees we are faced with a problem. Most of their face is not not lit by the sun directly but some is. Most of the face is now lit by open sky and the reflections off the landscape. In this situation we get a second reading with the meter pointed along that 120 degree line back toward the camera. That reading alone will get us a perfect exposure for the subject as lit by the open sky and reflections.

    At this point we have the info we need to decide on how to deal with both light sources. A simple averaging of these two readings is simple duplexing. It is a compromise. It does its best to protect detail from both lighting situations. It allows a little shadow and a little highlight detail to fall outside the straight print range. This is exceptionally useful for slide shooting. It also provides the info needed to make decisions about contrast, maybe we choose Astia or Provia here instead of Velvia to adjust to the SBR we decide we want. With negatives we can decide on development choices because we have the info needed to know if contrast is "normal" for us or not.

    Onward, SBR is a chosen range that we pick out of the scene. It isn't effected by anything else.

    With negatives as long as we get our whole chosen SBR somewhere between toe and shoulder on film, the exact placement doesn't matter to the contrast calculation. Sure an underexposure where we let things fall off the toe or overexposure where highlights fall off the shoulder are a problem but if we get in the middle there is no loss nor gain of SBR. Anything on film but outside our chosen SBR has to be accessed by using burn or dodge or changes in paper grade.

    Our challenge, when our SBR is in the middle, is matching our chosen SBR to our paper.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Ana´s Nin

  5. #14
    AndreasT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    353
    Thanks Elliot for your offer I may get back on that. I have been using BTZS for a few years and had some issues with it.
    I have not used slide film or colour film for over ten years now (unless I take photos of my cat). Isn’t it more important to orientate ones exposure a little more to the lighting using slide film? Letting more fall off in the shadows.
    With negative film pointing the dome directly to the light source will give us a high SBR and if we develop accordingly we do get rather soft negatives.
    I think it is important to keep the contrast up a bit and do the rest in the darkroom. At least in a high contrast scene.
    Personally I prefer the incident light meter since I believe (for me) it is easier to get good usable negatives where I get the information on the film.
    Still there should be a easy and simple rule how to use a light meter. There are enough people who take wonderful photographs and do not care about testing. Often I get asked how to measure a scene and I never find a simple way to explain it.
    The above article does help.

  6. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,158
    HI Mark:

    Thoughtful reply, and thanks.

    We will simply have to differ a bit in our ideas about the SBR being unaffected by the metering of the highlights. Perhaps I am not completely understanding your position (pun not entirely intended!).

    Note that I most often follow the BTZS methods in which the SBR value is obtained by high EV minus low EV plus five. Once again, this forum is certainly not the best place for a complete discussion of the pros and cons of the BTZS methodology which knowledge can be best obtained by reading some articles at BTZS.org and reading Mr. Davis's interesting book. Now might be a good time to remind folks that "BTZS" does NOT stand for "Better than the Zone System" as some have mistakenly believed. Indeed," Beyond the Zone System" is the correct translation!

    To extend your comments about metering: If you've a moment, simply walk into the light and meter a shadow point in our scene. Then point the dome of the meter at the make believe camera position and slowly rotate the dome upwards directly towards the sun. The EV reading will increase as the dome is pointed upwards; the SBR will increase ( high EV minus low EV etc), the developing time based upon testing meant to keep the film exposure on the "straight line" of the curve will decrease and the highlights are-as you pointed out-protected. Now point the dome directly at the make believe camera position so that the sun light strikes only the top or part of the dome rather than the "complete" circumference of the dome. The highlight EV value will decrease, the SBR will decrease, the developing time will increase, etc.. Note for emphasis that I am alluding to BTZS methodology. We entirely agree that one can manipulate the SBR for creative purposes-roughly analogous as zone shooters do when they "place and values fall". Of course, as we also agree, matching the SBR both to our creative vision and to the combination of paper and paper developer that we use, provides the creative control that analog black and white photographers seek.

    Incident metering is another tool, and one that some find extremely useful and even easy to use. However, like every tool, such metering will have to be applied correctly and modified by experience, results, and creative wishes. So, we agree in what is important: Making images that reflect one's intent and vision.

    Stay well Mark.

    Thanks again for stimulating the discussion.

    Elliot

  7. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,158
    No argument at all Andreas. BTZS adherents certainly do control the contrast of the negative by the placement of the highlights. Experience with such placement-when used with one's particular materials-allows one to affect the contrast of the resultant print.

    My last visit to Berlin was about 6-7 years ago. The cranes were all over the skyline, and Museum Island was being resurrected. The Parthenon....

    Chuss,

    Elliot

  8. #17
    AndreasT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    353
    Yeah at least what you saw back then is finished although they are still building something new next to the Parthenon, with have to check how far they are there. Haven’t been down there for a few months.
    But have you heard about the Airport. About two years behind schedule and it proberly going to take another two years. Embarrassing!!

  9. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,158
    Yes, I had heard recently about the construction at the Berlinairport. Then again, in my adopted home town of Hamburg construction at the new Harbor City is also encountering delays and massive cost over runs.

    Elliot

  10. #19
    baachitraka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,351
    Incident metering the shadows(placement is critical) and decreasing the exposure by a stop, works for me for roll film. But then testing is required to establish E.I and development times for seven stop development(personal choice).

    Thanks Mark Barendt and BTZS.
    OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
    Rolleicord Va: Humble.
    Holga 120GFN: Amazingly simple yet it produces outstanding negatives to print.

  11. #20
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,726
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Elliot I fully agree that where and how the head is oriented for each reading does make a distinct difference to the SBR calculation.

    Your reference to BTZS does bring up a good point, when we talk about and try to mentor others our frame of reference is very important.

    In my frame of reference and practice, when duplexing or measuring contrast I always point the incident meter directly at the light source for the highlight measurement then I measure parallel to the camera axis. I use these two because the highlights and the mid-tones are of most importance to me personally. Typically I only feather the meters head to bias my exposure when using a single dome out reading.

    For others, shadows and mid-tones, or shadows and highlights, may be more important to peg, there's no rule against picking different lines and places to measure, or to feathering the meter head one way or another, those are very reasonable artistic or technical choices.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Ana´s Nin

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  Ś   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin