Originally Posted by wiltw
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.