Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,572   Posts: 1,545,656   Online: 967
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31
  1. #21
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    I cannot believe what I am reading.
    Yes it is a bad idea to open up 1.5~2 on a reading of highlights, we can put that in the cement. By dint of the reverse, it is also absurd to stop down 1.5~2 for shadows. Where are these theories coming from? If you have shadow and highlights in your scene, tell me how both are to be enumerated and preserved. It's not impossible. But it does require craftiness.

    Slide film does not allow for for a sloppy approach to metering. In my images, there is very often conflicting "information" in the scene which must all be individually balanced: shadow and highlight. I would like to know what the basis is for additional exposure over a balanced reading. In competent hands it is submitted that there is no need for any additional compensation unless there is polarisation applied (variable compensation) or a B&W filter.

    I will also point out that bracketing is valuable in marginal scenes. I don't squander film, but I don't squander the opportunity to err on the safe side in difficult conditions. Of course, quite unnecessary for a lot of the time with B&W, but it is standard, common and professional practice with transparency.
    Poisson Du Jour,

    I am sure there is miscommunication here because you are a regular contributor and often we agree, even if I don't write back.

    I won't say the magic compensation is 1.5 or 2 stops, I just agree that it sounds like reasonable advice.

    Suppose you spotmeter an important highlight in a scene in bright daylight, say a scene that fits Sunny-16 exactly... The spotmeter reading of an important highlight will suggest f/32.

    But you know and I know the shot is to be taken at f/16.

    Now suppose there are deep shadows in that same scene.

    With slide film you will still stay with f/16... Because otherwise your important highlight will be destroyed.

  2. #22
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    In my images, there is very often conflicting "information" in the scene which must all be individually balanced: shadow and highlight.
    In your images where you are forced to lose shadows or highlights, then you are right. The oversimplification of "meter highlight and open up two stops" is over simple. A studied approach is better.

  3. #23
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    I would like to know what the basis is for additional exposure over a balanced reading..
    Aha, this is our issue. A spotmeter reading of the highlight is not a balanced reading!

  4. #24
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    ..you might just use 400 and make the settings as recommended by the camera. This will always overexpose a little, which is not bad. Most of the time you will have comfortable combinations of f/stop and shutter speed.

    Then whenever you need "just one higher shutter speed", you can be confident that it will be OK to take it.
    genkaimade,

    I think you can ignore the sidebar conversation if you are not using slides or a spotmeter.

    I would follow this advice I gave earlier. Set the camera at 400 and just use it that way. Once in a while, when you really need it, pick one faster shutter speed than the camera suggests. For example when it gets dark and suggests 1/30th second, you can pick 1/60th second.

    The reason I would follow that advice is because most of the time you won't have to think about it.

    I was out in the desert last weekend and brought a meter that requires a specific adjustment to work properly. I forgot to write down that adjustment and it messed with my mind. Lucky for me, I brought a second meter that I could trust at the standard settings so I used it until I could recompose my mind and think through the setting I should have written down in the first place. A little scrap of duct tape and Sharpie solved the problem.

    My point is that even one adjustment is hard to do in your mind.

  5. #25
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Geelong & Castlemaine, Victoria, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,583
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    Aha, this is our issue. A spotmeter reading of the highlight is not a balanced reading!


    My technique does not favour one nor the other (highlight or shadow), but all (including mid-tones) as a whole, balanced.
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

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






  6. #26
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    My technique does not favour one nor the other (highlight or shadow), but all (including mid-tones) as a whole, balanced.
    I will grant that your technique is superior!

    I've been shooting black and white for so long that I've not practiced the skill of nailing a precise exposure.

    For negative film it is most important to give enough exposure. And that is so easy, one meter reading will suffice.

    For slide film I hear tell that it is most important not to give too much exposure. But I will say you are right, you don't plunge a scene into darkness to hold a highlight. Instead you re-calculate and decide whether that highlight is really so important. If it destroys the balance of the picture, then you consider other parts of the scene and may decide to let your original important highlight wash out.

  7. #27
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Geelong & Castlemaine, Victoria, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,583
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    I will grant that your technique is superior!
    Probably. People do have trouble getting their head around what I am doing. I try to explain it as best I can! I rarely, if at all, us incident or reflective (am I about to open up a Pandora's box!?)

    I've been shooting black and white for so long that I've not practiced the skill of nailing a precise exposure.
    Because black and white has latitude, plenty of it, and critical metering isn't gospel unless you want it to be.

    For negative film it is most important to give enough exposure. And that is so easy, one meter reading will suffice.
    Assuming tonal distribution is even. If it is not...

    For slide film I hear tell that it is most important not to give too much exposure. But I will say you are right, you don't plunge a scene into darkness to hold a highlight. Instead you re-calculate and decide whether that highlight is really so important. If it destroys the balance of the picture, then you consider other parts of the scene and may decide to let your original important highlight wash out.
    The first sentence is correct, yes.
    Of third and fourth sentences, there is another option: I would leave the scene until conditions allowed me to balance things as I envisioned. If that cannot be done, I move along. Nothing is so critical or "once only" that it cannot be done or at least attempted again later. Bright sun and shadow is a major challenge in scenes like rainforests (my specialty) where there is a waterfall with seemingly flatter, or shadowed surroundings. This is where cunning is needed: all is not how it appears to film; enough exposure of the water to prevent blowing of highlights while giving enough exposure to shadow areas and allowing for the amount of time of the exposure that exponentially increases the risk of highlights blowing. The balance of both (highlight and shadow) will be clearly explained on the meter (ranging), but not necessarily always, universally, acceptably every time; if a reading is plus or minus 2 stops away from the opposite, you know something's not going to work. As I said, I can leave and return again. With print film, this is not a problem at all. It's the generous latitude. This metering business, understanding highlights, shadows and a midtone bias, is what gets people very frustrated when they come from the elegance and beauty of print film to the strident, unforgiving nature of transparency: many a photographer has ended up in tears at otherwise well composed images that have been lost to shadow or highlights blown until they look like chrome. It's vital to understand the difference. And Vital to research, experiment, repeat, refine until it is right. We can all help with this.

    I learnt basic metering in arts at university with a Weston meter. But I studied spot metering above all else alone and unassisted, burning a lot of rolls to experimentation and keeping notes as I went along.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I have to pack. An early start for a walk on the (very) wild side tomorrow; a lot of little things to be learnt, to be discovered...
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

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






  8. #28
    David Allen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    421
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    I cannot believe what I am reading.
    Yes it is a bad idea to open up 1.5~2 on a reading of highlights, we can put that in the cement. By dint of the reverse, it is also absurd to stop down 1.5~2 for shadows. Where are these theories coming from? If you have shadow and highlights in your scene, tell me how both are to be enumerated and preserved. It's not impossible. But it does require craftiness.

    Slide film does not allow for for a sloppy approach to metering. In my images, there is very often conflicting "information" in the scene which must all be individually balanced: shadow and highlight. I would like to know what the basis is for additional exposure over a balanced reading. In competent hands it is submitted that there is no need for any additional compensation unless there is polarisation applied (variable compensation) or a B&W filter.

    I will also point out that bracketing is valuable in marginal scenes. I don't squander film, but I don't squander the opportunity to err on the safe side in difficult conditions. Of course, quite unnecessary for a lot of the time with B&W, but it is standard, common and professional practice with transparency.
    With respect, I think that you have misread my post. Firstly, it was responding to the suggestion that the OP should follow the advice of Parker which I do not believe to be good advice. Secondly, by way of an example that Parker's suggestion is that it is too complicated to interpret the information that a meter gives you, I referred to the fact that my students have no problem in understanding the concept that a meter is suggesting an exposure to render something at 18% grey and that you, the photographer, need to realise that when you solely meter a shadow where you want detail the meter will suggest an exposure that is two stops more than the correct exposure. If you solely meter a highlight, the meter will suggest an exposure that is two stops too little. As students advance they learn to recognise that getting a perfectly exposed highlight or shadow is only part of the consideration in achieving an image that renders a scene how you want it.

    You state that opening up 2 stops for your highlights (when you have solely metered the highlight that you wish to retain adequate detail in) is a bad idea - why?. If you want a bright highlight with detail on transparency film then this is exactly what you need to do. If other considerations for the scene are of equal importance to you then you have to judge how you want to balance the competing demands that you scene presents you with - such as increased/reduced development, employing graduated filters, waiting for a different time of day, etc.

    You also state that closing down 2 stops for your shadows (when you have solely metered the shadow that you wish to retain adequate detail in) is absurd - why?. If you want a fully detailed shadow on negative film then this is exactly what you need to do. If other considerations for the scene are of equal importance to you then you have to judge how you want to balance the competing demands that you scene presents you with - such as increased/reduced development, employing graduated filters, waiting for a different time of day, etc.

    You ask where these 'theories' are coming from. If you have seen any of my other posts, you may well have noted that I am not a fan of theories but rather of practical solutions. The basis for the above concepts do originate from the Zone System but are also the results of real world photography. I have been photographing for many years and, until five years ago, undertook both commercial work and my own private work. For most of my commercial career advertising, editorial and product clients demanded the images as transparencies. I am therefore well versed in the exposure demands of such films and would agree that achieving a good transparency does not allow for sloppy technique.

    My personal work has always been black and white. For this I advise people to undertake tests to determine their personal Exposure Index (using practical film and darkroom based testing rather than step wedges and densitometers). Thereafter, the simple starting point for each scene is to meter the shadows where you wish to retain detail and stop down two stops. To ensure no loss of highlight details (I use a Mamiya 7 so I can't change backs to allow me to vary the development of individual rolls) I recommend using a two-bath developer (I personally use Barry Thornton's version).

    For the images that I like to make, I photograph scenes that tend to have a large subject brightness range (sunny 16 rule would never work for cityscapes that have very deep shadows and white painted walls in full sunlight). By exposing to retain full shadow detail and developing in a two-bath developer I achieve 100% easily printable negatives that allow for a broad range of interpretation. Every single image on my website was made following this procedure.

    Finally, bracketing is a personal matter. It does not bother me if someone brackets or not. However, when someone (such as Parker) suggests not learning to meter correctly but rather bracket every scene then I believe this to be bad advice. Many a good image can be lost this way.

    I hope this clarifies my original post and the basis for my comments.

    Bests,

    David
    www.dsallen.de

  9. #29
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Geelong & Castlemaine, Victoria, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,583
    Images
    15
    Currently reading up a little on the epistle of Fred Parker,having to bookmark it now
    Oh... all that "how to" but a lot of stuff on metering that I wouldn't fall back on unless I'd had one too many lattés.
    I am out of time tonight to continue this discussion. Catch up next week.
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

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






  10. #30
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    Currently reading up a little on the epistle of Fred Parker,having to bookmark it now
    Oh... all that "how to" but a lot of stuff on metering that I wouldn't fall back on unless I'd had one too many lattés.
    I am out of time tonight to continue this discussion. Catch up next week.
    In the spirit of Fred Parker, it helps to be filled with spirits to use and follow his ideas, if one was to take a light reading on the black area of the cat in your avitar and adds two stops, take a light reading on the white area and subtracts two stops, sums the two and divide by the square root of the logarithm base 10 of 2 and add that to the cosine of the left hypotenuse of a Baysian parallelogram then one would have the correct exposure.
    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.

Page 3 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