Sunny 16.. very accurate
Originally Posted by markbarendt
This works amazingly well.
I was photographing in the redwoods yesterday -- incredible light and no wind. Instead of sunny 16 with 125ASA film (f16 at 1/125th sec) I was using f16 at 4 seconds (actually f64 for 4 minutes).
At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can be a good day of exercise.
Originally Posted by benjiboy
Originally Posted by benjiboy
Really? Nobody else wants to comment on the irony here?
I have 2 Minolta meters. Luckily they read the same. I adjusted or have the shop adjusted my camera's meters so they read the same as my meters. So right or wrong I know what I am getting. I use them quite often but I do use the sunny 16 when I use a camera like the Minolta SRT-101 which requires mercury cell and even with Wein cell it's not accurate. Also I rather use the sunny 16 than using my old Weston Master II. I have the Weston just for fun I never use it.
Re: Sunny 16.. very accurate
I have a couple of Westons and find them to be accurate within their light sensitivity. They are useless for very low light.
Originally Posted by Chan Tran
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
If you consistantly use the same film and developer/time, you don't need a light meter. Apart from studio work I haven't used one for for the past twenty years.
“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”
Originally Posted by bushpig
I think Sunny 16 is a really good tool. It IS accurate. Nobody can argue that.
But at the same time - it doesn't really matter. If you have a way of shooting that works, whether it's with a meter or without - why would it matter, as long as you get what you want? And I'm a strong believer in repeatedly using the same thing, because practice makes perfect, not gadgets and gizmos, or the lack thereof.
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera".
- Yousuf Karsh
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit".
Learning to meter without light meter has its usefulness.
Imagine a situation when you are in the shade part of a street, the buildings behind you project a shade on you and your side of the street.
You want to take a picture of the other side of the road, a façade of a church in white marble kissed by the sun. The clouds play hide and seek with the sun, and you have to be fast if you want that light in your picture.
The user of "sunny 16" just select that exposure and he has a picture which is very probably quite right.
The user of a hand-held incident light meter must cross the road, measure the incident light, read that it is sunny 16, feel stupid for a moment, cross the road again, hope that in the meanwhile the light doesn't change. Crossing roads in Rome is not funny, motorists "don't take prisoners"
The user of a reflected light meter (whether in camera or hand-held) must measure the light on the other side of the road and then remember to compensate for the inevitable mistake that the reflected light meter will introduce when measuring a totally white object. The amount of compensation is always a bit puzzling as you have to "place" the white zone etc.
Which of the three methods is faster while guaranteeing an acceptable amount of precision? One can take a fast shot with sunny 16, seizing the moment and accepting the risk of a small exposure mistake, and then take the time for a measured and reasoned light reading for "fine tuning".
More in general the usefulness of the "sunny 16 rule" (or, let's say, choosing exposure by sight between LV 12 and 15) is that no light meter is accurate without a bit of reasoning, and as Benjiboy says "should be considered as a basis, in light of the photographers experience before making the exposure". That requires a bit of reasoning before making ANY exposure. The "sunny 16" can sometimes be just faster and more reliable.
In-camera meters are influenced by the background which changes continuously (dark or light, abundance of sky, relation sun-camera-photographer in backlit situations etc.) and can be definitely worse than using sunny 16.
Using an automatic camera will not solve the problem or can make it worse. Automatisms are only an emergency device.
As an example, while taking a subject which has a certain degree of back light during the central hours of the day, the "sunny 16" will suggest LV12 with a decently high degree of reliability while automatic exposure with a reflected light meter will be basically useless. Making a mental compensation to the automatic exposure is IMO less reliable than the sunny 16 rule.
"Matrix" metering introduces a random compensation based on what the camera thinks is the main subject. How is the camera supposed to know whether I want a silhouette of the "Petit Caporal" and have the background correctly exposed in this situation, or the statue correctly exposed and a burned background?
How can a camera think in my stead? Matrix metering is the worse of the worse as I cannot even "compensate" it as I don't know what the camera choose as important. With sunny 16 one just chooses EV15 with a guarantee of a correct outer exposure, a correct silhouette of the statue, not much reasoning and predictable results. And no walking forth and back for measuring what light there is outside.
Learning to meter without meter can be precious especially for "street shooting" when there is no time to even look at the camera setting. You know that your camera is set at 1/125@f/11 (100 ISO). You see a subject standing in shade (EV 12). You turn your aperture ring 2 clicks more open, focus and shoot, mentally counting the aperture clicks, without looking at the values on the camera and without checking the in-camera instrument (which requires "reasoning", analysis of the background etc). Especially with B&W, street shooting can be just "turn 2.5 apertures more open in shade" and "turn 2.5 apertures closer" for sun, leaving the shutter speed fixed and operating the aperture ring with extreme ease and speed.
Ahh yess! The seemingly lost art of setting exposure as the camera comes to your eye.
Originally Posted by Diapositivo