Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,000   Posts: 1,524,349   Online: 796
      
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 46
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,576
    Images
    27

    Metering White Churches

    I plan to burn a little film this coming weekend, and the subject matter will be many of the old wooden churches in central Texas. Now if the light is like today, gray and overcast, metering should not be as much a problem, but if it is bright and direct lighting I am curious how the folks here would handle the metering.

    My first thought on a bright day, is to go with the Sunny f/16 and stop down 2 stops..when shooting what I call a micro landscape (a portion of the building) vs a macro landscape (one that would include the building and surrounding area). Then there would be filter factors if the sky is include and say a polarizer or red/yellow filter is added.

    One of the churches I recall sitting in a grove of trees, so it will be deep shade, another sits on a hill with no shade at all. Still another I plan to shoot only the windows, the building is nothing special - but the windows seem to have a certain appeal.

    Film will be FP4+ 120 roll film and 4x5, rated at 64 and I plan to develope it in Rodinal, 1:100 using a semi-stand development. Of course if mother nature does not help me out with good light then my plans will change.

    Thanks in advance for your input.
    Mike C

    Rambles

  2. #2
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    Mike,
    I would consider placing the shaded church on zone V so that you still get an idea that it is a white church.
    As for the unshaded church, why not just place it on zone vii and let the rest fall where it will? If it's a bright sunny 16 day, you should still have plenty of detail if there are shadows.

    just my thoughts.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Mike,
    I don't recall how you meter. But if it were a bright sunlit day and I didn't have access to a meter then I would expose FP4 at 1/60 at F16.

    For hazy overcast I would open up a stop from there and for heavy overcast I would open still another stop from the first recommendation. If I were in shade it would be open another stop and in deep shade another stop or more depending on how much shade. Thus one could conceivably be exposing FPR at 1/60 second at F4...or more likely F22 at 1 second without filter factors to gain depth of field.

    Adding in filter factors with a #25 that would kick it out to 8 seconds at F22 without reciprocity. A #12 would be around 2 1/2 seconds under the same conditions. Under deep shade conditions I would give the film 20-24 seconds with a #25 and 5 seconds with a #12 filter to allow for reciprocity. I would then base my development time dependent on the contrast inherent in the scene.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,576
    Images
    27
    Donald,
    Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. I currently use a Polaris meter, with a semi-spot attachment (5 degree). Your exposure examples are what I had considered for a base for a white church, in bright sun, though I had not considered the reciprocity - I Thank You for that. Just was not sure if I needed to adjust the exposure as you might for snow, to hold the detail in the whites.
    Mike C

    Rambles

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Quote Originally Posted by photomc
    Donald,
    Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. I currently use a Polaris meter, with a semi-spot attachment (5 degree). Your exposure examples are what I had considered for a base for a white church, in bright sun, though I had not considered the reciprocity - I Thank You for that. Just was not sure if I needed to adjust the exposure as you might for snow, to hold the detail in the whites.
    Mike,
    Since you have a meter with spot attachment...I would meter my shadows and place them on a Zone III or IV placement. This would be one to two stops less exposure then the meter indicates. I would next meter the white church and give three stops more exposure then the meter indicates. This would place the church on a Zone VIII exposure since the meter converts everything to a Zone V luminance. If you find that this range amounts to six stops then I would develop the negative for normal development. If that range is less then six stops then I would increase development to expand contrast. If the range is greater then six stops then I would reduce development to reduce contrast. The filter factor would probably not alter that contrast range materially...the caveat being shadows which would typically be filled with blue light and a yellow or red filter would lower the shadow values because of that consideration.

    As always expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,410
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Miller
    Mike,
    I don't recall how you meter. But if it were a bright sunlit day and I didn't have access to a meter then I would expose FP4 at 1/60 at F16.
    ....
    I'm interested in this as well. Just to understand you correctly Donald. In the statement above, have you allowed an extra stop to push the exposure up a zone - keeping in mind FP4's 125 ISO rating?

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Quote Originally Posted by John McCallum
    I'm interested in this as well. Just to understand you correctly Donald. In the statement above, have you allowed an extra stop to push the exposure up a zone - keeping in mind FP4's 125 ISO rating?
    Yes, John, that is correct. Typically the manufacturers ISO rating on a film is based upon the zone I density being .10 above FB+fog. Thus the sunny F16 rule would follow the manufacturers ISO rating. I find that increasing exposure above the advertised ISO (in this case derating FP4 by one stop) will impart better shadow separation (by getting the exposure up off the toe of the characteristic curve sooner).

    The additional benefit is an increased sense of light within the image. This is all true for exposures without a meter. If one learns to read the intensity and quality of light without the constraints of a meter that leaves more room for intuitive photography in my opinion.

  8. #8
    Les McLean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Northern England on the Scottish border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Miller
    Mike,
    Since you have a meter with spot attachment...I would meter my shadows and place them on a Zone III or IV placement. This would be one to two stops less exposure then the meter indicates. I would next meter the white church and give three stops more exposure then the meter indicates. This would place the church on a Zone VIII exposure since the meter converts everything to a Zone V luminance. If you find that this range amounts to six stops then I would develop the negative for normal development. If that range is less then six stops then I would increase development to expand contrast. If the range is greater then six stops then I would reduce development to reduce contrast. The filter factor would probably not alter that contrast range materially...the caveat being shadows which would typically be filled with blue light and a yellow or red filter would lower the shadow values because of that consideration.

    As always expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights.

    Surely if you place the shadow on Zone III or IV you cannot also place the highlight as you appear to be suggesting, it will FALL on the Zone governed by the number of stops different from the shadow value.
    "Digital circuits are made from analogue parts"
    Fourtune Cookie-Brooklyn May 2006

    Website: www.lesmcleanphotography.com

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    I realize what my words seemed to indicate. What I intended to indicate was that one should place the shadows and then determine where the highlights would fall. From this scene brightness ratio, one can determine the degree of departure from normal development of the negative. I hope that this clarifies this for you.

    This went off into several areas. The first being how I would expose if no meter was employed to the placement of zones if a meter was employed. I apologize for any confusion that this may have caused.

  10. #10
    ThomHarrop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    172
    Images
    6
    I am not sure whether this is too late for your weekend shoot but here is my take on it. I like to look at the most important values in a scene. In this case you want to be sure you get texture in the white of the church. So, meter the white where you want to get texture and open up two stops from that reading. If you want to make sure you also get shadow detail you can meter the difference between the highlight and shadow as the sun goes down and make the exposure when you have about a 4 stop difference. This is a bit backward from normal Zone system approach but should give you what you want in the image.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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