Re: On camera vs. Incident light metering: which is best?

>My question is will I learn more about light (and take better photographs)

>if I use an incident light meter instead of the easy to use on-camera

>prism meter? My subject matter varies from white wedding cakes to

>landscapes, and I really don't care if one metering method is quicker or

>more convenient than the other...

<p>

My experience is entirely with outdoor subjects (landscape, travel, and general nature) and transparency film, so I can speak to only a portion of what you intend to do. I shoot some 35mm, but mostly 4 x 5 & MF.

<p>

You've asked a straightforward question which, unfortuantely, has no simple answer. I can rely on the camera's meter in my 35mm (Nikon F3) for most shots, with only an occasional need to bracket. Some situations (as when areas are small on the film but critically important to the image) call for additional bracketing, or a spot meter. And, the wider the lens, the more likely I am to reach for my spot meter, because more of the image is reproduced at a magnification too small for accurate measurement by the in-camera meter.

<p>

With 4 x 5 there is of course no internal meter, and I find that about 85% of my exposures are determined with the spot meter and the rest with an incident meter. Remember, with an incident meter you must be in the same light as your subject. With outdoor work, this can be difficult or impossible.

<p>

With MF, the result is pretty much the same. I use in-camera meters only when the lighting is very even and when I judge that the exposure for the entire subject is easily read by a center weighted meter. More often--much more often--I see something in a scene that I wish to appear on film in certain way in relation to the rest of the scene, and this requires that I measure the tonal range present, and then assign an exposure value that puts everything where I want it (within the latitude of the film, of course). This is precisely what a spot meter is for, and what it does better than anything else. I fall back on my incident meter only in those situations where the reflected light values are so difficult to read that I can't pre-visualize how the elements of the scene will look on the exposed transparency, and even then, to repeat myself, only when this happens to me while I am in the same light as my subject.

<p>

To sum up. If you are not satisfied with the exposure results that you get from your in-camera meter, and you are not concerned about speed and convenience in metering, then learn to use a spot meter as your primary exposure measurement tool (at least for outdoor work. Get an incident meter for those situations where it is needed to resolve questions of tricky reflected light, or where it can quickly tell you everything you need to know. I think that working with a spot meter is the best way to develop your ability to read and interpret outdoor scenes, with respect to the way they will reproduce on film.

<p>

That's my experience, FWIW.

<p>

Gordon Vickrey

krmhlz@earthlink.net

Gordon,

<p>

Thank you for your thorough answer. After reading through, I realize how a spot meter would give me the ability to decide which elements of the image I want to emphasize and also how I might be in control of the overall exposure.

<p>

It has always bothered me to bracket everything I shoot- it's really admitting that I do not understand how to control exposure very well when I am shooting everything in triplicate and hoping for the best.

<p>

What a beautiful struggle it is to improve as a photographer!