"Metering" when in manual mode...is it necessary?

<p>First let me start off by thanking all in advance for any help in understanding this basic question. I have spent endless hours researching photography this winter in anticipation of the warm weather thats right around the corner. I consider myself to be pretty intelligent but am having a heck of a time understanding "metering". I know how it functions and have a basic grasp of the different types but I feel like I get a different opinion, depending on the source, as to which metering method is best for portrait photography. Am I correct in my belief that it is technically irrelevant when shooting in "Manual" mode as I prefer to do? More importanly maybe, am I approaching it wrong by shooting in "Manual" as a beginner? If it is of any significance I own a Canon XSi. Again thanks in advance for your help.</p>

<p>In manual mode, you determine how much light the sensor receives by setting the aperture and shutter speed. There are several ways you can find out what shutter speed and aperture combination will give you the best result:</p>

<p>1. You can use certain "rules" that say, for example: "on a sunny day, with the ISO set at 200, the shutter speed at 200, an aperture of f/16 will give you a good exposure." (The rule is more general than that, but this makes the clearest example.)</p>

<p>2. Particularly when using a digital camera on an unchanging subject like a landscape, you can make a guess, look at your result (especially the histogram) and adjust the exposure.</p>

<p>3. You can also use your camera's meter. Often, the quickest and most practical way is to use the meter. For landscapes when the light is not changing quickly, it is not necessary, just convenient. If you have to shoot fast, however, the camera's meter, together with your adjustments (exposure compensation) based on knowledge and experience, becomes so useful that you have to consider it necessary.</p>

<p>You have to base your manual settings on something, right? So yes, metering is necessary in manual mode. There are ways to get around that, like the 'sunny 16' rule, but a light meter is a bit more precise than that. When you say portrait, are you talking about studio portrait with strobes, or candid portraits. That makes a difference. Incident light metering with a separate (not in-camera) light meter is the most precise but not very suited for candids. There is no such thing as 'the best' way to meter for portrait photography. Any refelected-light measurement can be thrown off by dark or light subjects, so you will have to correct for that no matter what the metering mode. But the mode you use determines how much of the frame is used when metering, so different modes will give different results in an inhomogeneous scene. For example, spot metering may work well when the spot is on skin (assuming light skin here), but not on black hair.</p>

<p>I think I interpret your question somewhat differently to the responder above.<br>

If you do not choose an aperture and shutter speed when the camera is set to Manual then the camera will use whatever settings it happens to be on in manual mode or whatever values are set as the cameras default when switched to Manual. In other words your exposures will be kind of random and will bear no relationship to the actual needs of the scene.</p>

<p>If you want to use the camera without setting either aperture of shutter speed then use P-Program Mode, in which the camera will decide and set what it thinks is the best values for exposure. In Av mode you choose the aperture manually then the camera selects the shutter speeds based upon its meter reading. I think that many people use this mode for portraits because of the need to control depth of field to give the sharpness required in the subject, often whilst throwing the background a little out of focus. </p>

<p>If you are in Manual the meter is there to offer you advice as to the settings that you should apply on the camera. As a beginner, I suggest that you should accept that advice. You will learn as you grow that sometimes you need to override the meter's advice, and sometimes you need to change the way the meter works - for example by changing from evaluative to centre weighted to partial /spot metering. But all that can come in the future. </p>

<p>By setting the parameters (iso, aperture and speed) manually you are ignoring the camera's advice on how to achieve a correct exposure.</p>

<p>I took me some time to figure out that you can actually ignore the camera's advice and be happier shooting in M.<br /> For this reason I can't think of a preferred metering method for portraits.</p>

<p>Paying attention to the meter reading does help me a lot to prevent unwanted under or overexposing. After the exposure I use the histogram to confirm.</p>

<p>Regards, Nico</p>

<p>Thank you all so much for the informative and rapid responses. I have learned so much from you guys (and gals) on here and look forward to taking some photo's worth posting soon. So I think I understand a lot more now than I did just a few hours ago. The "metering" is basically acting like a hand held light meter and helping you (When in aperture and shutter priority) in predicting what the opposing value should be. In photo's with a significant amount of darks or highlights I may get a false reading and may have to step my shot up or down. I guess that is why they say spot-metering is so much harder to master in that it only reads off a very small part of the entire scene, causing the photographer to make sure he reads off something that will not blow out the highlights or lose shadow detail. If I am still not getting it feel free to guide me in the right direction. Wierd that I could read so much about it and not grasp it till I get on here and ask for some expert assistance. Thank you all so very much for your time and attention. It is more appreciated than you know. </p>

This website - http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm - is well worth reading and digesting while waiting for warmer weather.

<p>Douglas - here's a thought. Imagine a constant light source shining on a white egg sitting on a black background with texture to it. If you take a reflected (in camera or handheld) meter reading of the egg...it will be exposed to deliver approximately an 18% grey shade, and the black background will be solid black. If you instead take a reflected meter reading of the background, you will see the texture, but the black will be exposed to deliver an 18% grey shade and the egg will be blown out. Now, you take an incident meter reading (measuring the light falling on the scene), and surprise, surprise, the egg turns out white without being blown out, and the black turns out black with a hint of texture. The lesson here iss that when taking reflected light meter readings, you need to remember that whatever you are reading off of, will be exposed to deliver an 18% shade of grey...and you may need to dial in compensation, or manually adjust your exposure to compensate to deliver what you are trying to capture. If this is pretty clear to you, then get Ansel Adams' book "The Negative" or one of the fine books on the Zone System and read it about 5 times...you won't have problems delivering proper exposure thereafter. If this isn't clear to you...reread it and think about exactly what you are measuring when you take a reading. It may initially seem counter intuitive to increase exposure when metering a light subject or decrease it for a dark subject...but after a while it sinks in.</p>

<p>You should always meter. But by being in manual mode, you are already saying that you want to use the meter as a <strong>suggestion, not a law</strong> . If you never meter, you will get some pretty "off" shots, but if you meter, and then <strong>base</strong> your expsosure on that reaading you will be fine. I think a lot of begining photographers use the meter as a bible, they always follow it, always. But its not alwasy right and as time goes on you will get a feeling for when you should trust it, and when you should interpret it.</p>

<p>Douglas,</p>

<p>I second Galen's comment. Regardless of mode, I use a meter reading as a first guess. Use the histogram on the LCD to see whether the camera's guess was reasonable. If not, use exposure compensation or manual settings to fix it.</p>

<p>Spot metering is very useful, and one of my few regrets about my XTi is that it does not have it. My old Canon FTb had only a spot meter, and I found it great. You can choose what areas you want to meter, and you can compare different regions of the scene. I sometimes used used the spot to meter off my hand, using the old rule of thumb that an open palm is about one stop off. With my XTi, I more often than not use partial metering. But regardless, just take a reading, check the histogram, and change it if you need to. That's one of the great things about digital: you can see immediately if you have the wrong exposure and redo the shot.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>Doug,<br>

I can only add a little to the good advice already given.<br>

Meters can and often are fooled by many lighting situations. Experience will eventually be your guide. White snow on a sunny day is a perfect example as the meter will dictate a F/stop that under exposes the image. All experienced shooters know this.<br>

The meter will get me close so I don't waste time, but the final outcome that I desire will often force intervention by the photographer.<br>

Matrix, center & spot metering all have their place once we understand what it is we are attempting to capture (The Subject) and HOW the various metering modes interpret the light.<br>

Pete</p>

<p>" Am I correct in my belief that it is technically irrelevant when shooting in "Manual" mode as I prefer to do? More importanly maybe, am I approaching it wrong by shooting in "Manual" as a beginner?"</p>

<p>There is nothing wrong with shooting in manual mode as a beginner. It wasn't that long ago that there was nothing but "Manual" on the camera controls. It'd be wrong if it saps your confidence, or if you completely did not understand what the controls meant. As long as you can set the camera to do what you want to generate the results that you want, basically, you are good to go. For example, there is no big commercial "bonus" paid out for making a great shot on Manual. You might take a ribbing from your fellow photographers for too many "Program" shots; that's about it; they just want to encourage you to learn about how to use the equipment properly. </p>

<p>I would think that metering would be very relevant in manual mode. At least it is for me. My evaluations and measurements of what I think is important in the scene is part of why I use manual equipment. I use that so heavily that I found out a camera I have been using for the past nine months has an aperture-priority and shutter-priority mode. I didn't know; I had just never set the thing to the right conditions; I found out about it accidentally after a mirror lockup malfunction sent me back to the user's manual. </p>

<p>As far as spot meters go, I love them. Now that I finally have one, I think they are so important that they should come very soon in someone's career. Not to say that other light meter designs are inferior; but I have tried these, and they helped me a lot. I probably cleared up more questions in the first week of using a spot meter than I had in the preceding years of in-camera meter use.</p>

<p>That said, ultimately, how relevant a measurement is depends on what the photographer decides. At the beginner level, I'd recommend this: Use the camera's recommendation for a shot. Use your metering skills for a shot. Then eyeball the scene and set the camera for what you think the settings should be. Make some notes about the settings so that you can review them later. This kind of exercise helps to bring together metering and scene evaluation and a knowledge of camera and film capabilities over time.</p>

<p>See what the instrument is telling you; see what you are telling the instrument. Some exercise shots like this can improve the conversation. Good luck. J.</p>

<p>Thanks again for all of the great imput and help. Stephen, I will get that book by Ansel Adams in hopes to get me ahead of the learning curve that I am sure will need to take place in order to get the full concept of light metering. Charles, thanks for that website. It explained a lot and will definately be called upon when I do my next shoot. To all of you who took the time to post, I thank you so much for passing along your knowledge of photography. I will certainly jump on here and post next time my research leaves me without a full understanding of the topic in question. Thank you all so very much!!!</p>