Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,900   Posts: 1,555,797   Online: 861
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32
  1. #11
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,609
    Images
    122
    The phrase commonly used is "the darkest area you want to see detail in"


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    The phrase "expose for the shadows" is thrown around easily in photographic circles. Unfortunately, like most rules of thumb, if not accompanied by further understanding of its meaning, following the "rule" will make your results worse than they would be shooting with an in-camera averaging or patterned reading, automatic exposure, or even an educated guess or pre-printed exposure chart.

    Additionally, and very importantly, the term is designed to be used in conjunction with "develop for the highlights". If the second half of the rule is not heeded as well, you can really get some mangled exposures, with bulletproof densities on the highlight areas of your negatives. Yet again: worse than just going with what your camera sez to do.

    "Expose for the shadows" does not mean to meter a shadow and employ the exposure your meter sez to use. It means meter the shadows and expose to place them at the desired negative density that will make them easily print to *your desired tone* and contain *your desired amount of detail*.

    If you expose for the shadows straight off of the meter, your shadows will easily print to a middle grey, and the over all shot will be one to four stops over a decent exposure. (It is such a wide range of possible amounts of overexposure because there is a wide range of what you might *want* the shadows to look like.)

    Your [reflected light] meter *does not* tell you what the "right" exposure is. It tells you how to make something easily print to a middle grey, and nothing else. All it does is give you that one reference exposure that will make the metered object easily print to a middle grey tone. It is up to you to know what it is telling you, and make your exposure decisions based on the knowledge of what exposure will render the metered area as middle grey.

    In other words, you need to decide what kind of grey you want the metered area to be on the print. It is likely not middle grey. To make something darker than middle grey, you need to give less exposure than the meter suggested. Vise Versa for areas that you want lighter than middle grey. You can reduce exposure from the meter reading by one stop if you want it to just be a little darker than medium grey, two stops if you want it dark grey but still with detail, three stops if you want it very dark grey with some texture but no detail, four stops if you want it to be nearly black with no detail or texture, and five stops if you want it to be totally black. Vise versa for the lighter end of the gray scale.

    This all assuming that the EI you are using gives you accurate placement. This opens another can of worms...

    There are three basic ideas behind the practice of "placement" of print tones (AKA the zone system), and one preliminary fundamental idea:

    0. *The negative is an intermediary step on the way from 3D world to 2D print.* Your quest is not to get a "perfect" negative as defined by the books or anybody but you. The quest is to get *the print that you want*. To get this, *you need to know what you want*! This is an artistic/aesthetic choice and has nothing to do with technique. It has everything to do with *visualization*. Then, on the technical side, you have to know how to get a negative that will let you get that print. Basically, this entails:

    1. Figuring out an EI (film sensitivity input into a light meter, such as 100, 400, etc.). This lets you *predictably place low tones where you want them to be on your PRINT*.

    2. Figuring out a standard development procedure. This lets you know what development procedure will closely match *contrast at the scene* to *contrast on the negative* to *contrast on the PRINT*. (In practice, I find that this works out to simply be a reference point in most cases, and is rarely ever actually used. This is the step that lets you know where your highlights will end up if developed normally, thus tells you how to employ number 3

    3. Figuring out altered developing procedures. This lets you change the relationships named in number 2 above. This is the main step in how you how to control the PRINT tones of the highlights.

    To get what you want, all of these steps must be calibrated to *your* actual prints by eye, not just some magic "correct" negative densities that you got out of an Ansel Adams book.

    Back to number 0, the zone system is just a tool to take a healthy amount of control over that intermediary step. Don't blow it up beyond what it is. it is a very easy system, and that is why it works so well, and is so popular, IMO. This is all about serving your idea of what your print should look like; nothing else. That is the part that most zone "users" *do not* get.

    Sorry for the stupid book.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 04-02-2009 at 06:22 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  3. #13
    dwdmguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Freehold, NJ
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    819
    Thank you to each of you but could someone please walk me thru an example of doing this? It's becoming a bit confusing. Here's what I've got thus far, if indeed I'm correct....

    The meter in my Leica M6 is designed for zone V, so if that is in fact a netural gray, why would I not meter off of a Med. gray and then recompose and shoot. This is my disconnect but if you can just walk me thru an example it would help a great deal. Thank you so much again.
    Tom

  4. #14
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,609
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by dwdmguy View Post
    why would I not meter off of a Med. gray and then recompose and shoot.
    Why not indeed. If you have a medium grey in the scene or nearby then this is a perfectly good way to meter. No need to complicte things for now.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Dedham, Ma, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    625
    When shooting 35mm, I just meter off the palm of my hand (zone VI) and open 1 stop.
    "Pictures are not incidental frills to a text; they are essences of our distinctive way of knowing." Stephen J. Gould

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Floriduh
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,272
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by dwdmguy View Post
    Thank you to each of you but could someone please walk me thru an example of doing this? It's becoming a bit confusing. Here's what I've got thus far, if indeed I'm correct....

    The meter in my Leica M6 is designed for zone V, so if that is in fact a netural gray, why would I not meter off of a Med. gray and then recompose and shoot. This is my disconnect but if you can just walk me thru an example it would help a great deal. Thank you so much again.
    Tom
    In alot of respects it's all about shooting alot of film and learning thru mistakes. But don't get too caught up in the topic to the point you become brain locked trying to figure out just what the heck to do. Now you can certainly meter off a medium gray card and could just as well use an incident meter. This would theoretically give you the right exposure to capture the brightness range scene as long as it's not outside the films capabilities and it is average, but many times not every scene is the same as far as it's division into equal areas of brightness. Camera metering systems evolved into multiple zone divisions as high as 20+ just to handle such complications so to give a good exposure to the layperson.
    Now as a somewhat simple example considering shadow and highlight metering, the most easily understood example is when you shoot a black cat and a white cat whole frame. Both will come out medium gray. If you want the black cat black you have to give less exposure. If you want the white cat white you have to give more. If your in the deep woods and you are shooting an enviromental portrait of a person that only takes up 15% of the viewfinder off center, the woods will be medium gray and the person will be a stop or two lighter, depending. It's all about remembering that the brightness range will be averaged to medium gray and hopefully the exposure will be correct. Now if you used an incident meter to meter the subject in the woods example above or used a gray card the person would be of average tones and the woods would be dark (or bright) according to their reflectance. Some advanced metering systems are good at metering, simple CW meters are not so one usually needs to make adjustments. I say as a learning tool in extreme low or high brightness ranges to take your first shot using the incorporated meters suggestion and then shoot additional exposures 1.5 stops open and 1.5 stops closed down from the meter reading. 1 roll will clue you in real fast in standard developing and printing without print exposure adjustment. In the zone system shooting individual sheets of film you can alter exposure/development for each sheet to increase or decrease the tonal/detail range according to your desires.
    W.A. Crider

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Dedham, Ma, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    625
    35mm is the best choice for fast shooting - many frames in short time intervals - that's how you get more keepers. Concerning yourself with exact exposure technique defeats the purpose of using that format. By the time you decide on the correct exposure the best shots are sometimes missed. It's better to fire of a few frames while bracketing the exposure, in 3 or 4 seconds, instead of fiddling while the shot is missed.
    "Pictures are not incidental frills to a text; they are essences of our distinctive way of knowing." Stephen J. Gould

  8. #18
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,188
    Quote Originally Posted by panastasia View Post
    35mm is the best choice for fast shooting - many frames in short time intervals - that's how you get more keepers. Concerning yourself with exact exposure technique defeats the purpose of using that format. By the time you decide on the correct exposure the best shots are sometimes missed. It's better to fire of a few frames while bracketing the exposure, in 3 or 4 seconds, instead of fiddling while the shot is missed.
    OMG! :o

    I do not know where to start on this one!

    I'll just sit back and watch the fun ...


    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by panastasia View Post
    35mm is the best choice for fast shooting - many frames in short time intervals - that's how you get more keepers. Concerning yourself with exact exposure technique defeats the purpose of using that format. By the time you decide on the correct exposure the best shots are sometimes missed. It's better to fire of a few frames while bracketing the exposure, in 3 or 4 seconds, instead of fiddling while the shot is missed.
    Thanks for doing your part to help keep film alive!
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  10. #20
    CPorter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,662
    Images
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by dwdmguy View Post
    The meter in my Leica M6 is designed for zone V, so if that is in fact a netural gray, why would I not meter off of a Med. gray and then recompose and shoot.
    Yes, I think you should do this, but not without first understanding the limitations of the gray card, you can't expect too much from it in certain situations---it will definitely let you down if you are not aware.

    The meter assumes that what you are pointing it at contains equal amounts of light and dark areas (i.e., average), this is why it is calibrated to return exposure values to provide negative density values that print middle gray. When there are other reflectances in the scene brighter or darker than the gray card, then you can expect them to print readily. But this is only when all areas of the scene are receiving the same amount of light intensity, such as on an overcast day or on the shady side of a building with a clear blue sky.

    When the subject is illuminated by the sun, then this means that there are also areas not illuminated by the sun i.e., the shadow areas-------therefore, the card cannot compensate for the low level of luminance in those shadows; if the shadows are too dark, then you shouldn't expect much density on the negative. This is where the use of a spot meter along with the refinements of the Zone System allow you to provide adequate exposure to the shadows, while controlling the density in the highlights through development.

    So, what 2F/2F said earlier is true, the other half of "expose for the shadows" i.e., to "place the shadow" on the low end of the gray scale is to "develop for the highlights" so they will "fall" on the upper end of the gray scale where you want them to-----easily done with intelligent use of the ZS.

    With the gray card however, you are "placing" the exposure on a known middle value and then letting all other reflectances "fall" on the gray scale relative to the luminance of the gray card. The card will fail you totally in some shadow areas----and it may even fail you in other shadow areas that seem to have developed with some density but perhaps not enough to suit you. The shadows, as you know, are not illuminated the same.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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