Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,221   Posts: 1,532,338   Online: 1081
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: light meter

  1. #21
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SE Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,539
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltw View Post
    This is sounding like two four year olds arguing...can either of you state precisely WHY you contend your side of the argument?!

    Certainly, if people can benefit from education derived from 25 years of professional experience, a great deal of that taming anything from Kodachrome 25 to Velvia 50 (and a few other trophies).

    1. If you hold out an incident meter in an open landscape you are blithely assuming the scene is average, when it is not. Transparency film never sees, or records the scene, as average.

    2. A scene as an example, contains four to six areas of widely varying contrast. How does an incident meter determine the individual luminosity of these variations, their position in importance and balance them? No, we're not talking the Zone System.

    3. The scene contains areas of shadow, highlights and — oh goody — spectrals. Incident meter it. What did you miss?

    4. An incident meter has no means of knowing what it is looking at or what it is metering, and furthermore doesn't care. It's still going to interpret the scene as "average" because it does not have the ability to individually select and analyse critical parts of the scene. This is the fundamental mistake repeated by legions of photographers using transparency film. It's essential to understand NO scene can be considered average: neither with highlights, shadows, flat light, emergent light or spectrals. Certainly not with the limited span of latitude with transparency. Do what you want with B&W, you can correct it in the darkroom, but you won't be afforded that luxury otherwise.

    And now, the other side please for the benefit of those reading.

    Back to work.
    Last edited by Poisson Du Jour; 10-30-2013 at 01:20 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






  2. #22
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,191
    Images
    343
    When we look at pictures our eyes read the lighter areas more readily than the darker areas. We have all made those prints in the darkroom, that despite many test strips, we didn’t notice that white blob when making a final print. For this reason loss of shadow detail is more acceptable to the human eye than loss of highlight detail. On a print we can burn in and/or reduce contrast. With a transparency/slide it is not so easy to correct. Therefore a slightly dense transparency is more acceptable than one where light parts of the image are literally missing. Incident readings are less likely to give over exposed highlights. However, all pictures are subjective and I do respect your point of view.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  3. #23
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,657
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    1. If you hold out an incident meter in an open landscape you are blithely assuming the scene is average, when it is not.
    Not true.

    You are making assumptions about the user and the use of an incident meter without basis.

    All ANY meter does is provide a reference point with each reading. It is up to the user how to position the meter and interpret the results.

    ANY meter can be used well or poorly with results to match.

    I'd suggest that incident meters require less interpretation so for the grand majority of people, regardless of film type, they will typically provide better results.

    Spot meters are very handy but they are specialty tools that require special skill and experience. Reflective meters of all types require more interpretation, even an F6 Nikon with all the fancy algorithms gets fooled.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  4. #24
    wiltw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    742
    Thank you both, Gary and Clive, for providing some reasons for your previous one word opinions of meter suitability.

    I tend to side more with Gary in the assessment that "An incident meter has no means of knowing what it is looking at or what it is metering, and furthermore doesn't care." For that reason, if we have bright highlights which would overexpose and wash out detail in the color transparency, we end up with clear base and no details. (The same exposure with color neg would be well tolerated due to it tolerance to overexposure.) Meter the same scene with a spotmeter, and I know precisely how to expose so that the highlights will be captured best on film, and avoid the clear detailess filmbase.

    If I shoot for publication, I use the one-degree spotmeter to measure highlights and deepest shadow, to decide placement of my exposure to best capture the full dynamic range of the scene and the midpoint of the range...and that might not match what the incident meter says. Futhurmore, the spotmeter allows me to determine if the lighting needs to reduce the dynamic range to fit within which is achievable on the printed page by the offset press; you can't do that with an incident meter.

  5. #25
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,240
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltw View Post
    "An incident meter has no means of knowing what it is looking at or what it is metering, and furthermore doesn't care." For that reason, if we have bright highlights which would overexpose and wash out detail in the color transparency, we end up with clear base and no details. (The same exposure with color neg would be well tolerated due to it tolerance to overexposure.)
    If you take your incident reading in the light that is creating those highlights, the transparency film will most likely record detail, because that is what it its speed rating is designed to ensure. The only exception would be specular highlights, where there aren't any details anyways, or other extremely reflective surfaces.

    While it is true that the range of the transparency film is limited, an incident reading will generally ensure that your exposure is well centred on the range available in the subject. If necessary, when the range is too wide for the film's capabilities, you can decide to adjust the exposure to favor highlight detail at the expense of the shadows.

    Spot meters are excellent when used by those with experience and excellent specialized judgment. If you don't have a spot meter, or you don't have that experience or the specialized judgment, an incident meter will give you a much higher percentage of good exposures than other reflected light meters.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  6. #26
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,657
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltw View Post
    Thank you both, Gary and Clive, for providing some reasons for your previous one word opinions of meter suitability.

    I tend to side more with Gary in the assessment that "An incident meter has no means of knowing what it is looking at or what it is metering, and furthermore doesn't care." For that reason, if we have bright highlights which would overexpose and wash out detail in the color transparency, we end up with clear base and no details. (The same exposure with color neg would be well tolerated due to it tolerance to overexposure.) Meter the same scene with a spotmeter, and I know precisely how to expose so that the highlights will be captured best on film, and avoid the clear detailess filmbase.

    If I shoot for publication, I use the one-degree spotmeter to measure highlights and deepest shadow, to decide placement of my exposure to best capture the full dynamic range of the scene and the midpoint of the range...and that might not match what the incident meter says. Futhurmore, the spotmeter allows me to determine if the lighting needs to reduce the dynamic range to fit within which is achievable on the printed page by the offset press; you can't do that with an incident meter.
    The ignorance of meters is universal. Spot meters have no idea about what they are being pointed at either.

    As with all things photographic, we each decide where to point our tools and we provide the context needed to make decisions about what to do with the reading. It's the nut behind the camera that makes it work, not the tool in his or her hand.

    Way back in time before incident meters got their domes a technique was developed to address the blown highlights problem on transparency film when shooting in high contrast situations, its called duplexing.

    Classic duplexing takes two readings: one with the meter pointed "back at the lens", essentially the same as is taught in incident meter manuals today, this reading is to find the "best" exposure for the main subject matter; the other reading is taken with meter pointed directly at the main light source, sun or whatever, this is to find the "best" setting for the highlights. These readings are then averaged, just as is normally done with shadow and highlight readings from a spot meter. (This model makes certain assumptions, like "the mid-tones and the highlights are what we want to protect". If shadows are more important than say mid tones just replace that reading with a different orientation of the meter head.)

    In both cases, averaged duplexed and averaged spot readings, a compromise is made. In high contrast lighting when using say Velvia, there is simply not enough film range to get all the highlights and all the shadow detail we might want. Something is going to be lost, both methods simply do their best to find the best balance.

    Side note. After incident meters got their domes duplexing for front lit and cross lit scenes became almost unnecessary, the final camera setting is normally the same. Duplexing does still have real value though when the subject is backlit.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  7. #27
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SE Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,539
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by STEVEP51 View Post
    HI GUYS when i shoot landscapes where do i point the light meter some landscapes can be in the distance and cant physcally take a reading all so do i use the white cone i use a sektronic meter and a6x7 M/F camera which im learning to use before i go to the usa please can you help MANY THANKS STEVE.

    What Sekonic are you using, Steve?
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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