fjords Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 <And any f/stop can be used for the wrong reasons.> cool! now you got me excited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_scheitrowsky1 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 Someone said indoors was tricky; I'll have to disagree. There is a much more limited range of exposures posible indoors than outdoors. Bright institutional flourescent lighting (and diffuse window light) are both 1/60 at f4 with 400 speed film. Dim household tungsten light is 1/30 at f2. Indoors is easy. It's the stormy, rainy, or dusk exposures that have me reaching for my meter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbizarro Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 You guys must be geniuses. I have learned to use and trust my camera's meter, so I now know when it gets fooled and compensate accordingly. Anything that makes it easier for me to concentrate on composition and light and moment, will result in my photos becoming better. The more I can rely in the camera, the better. Of course, for average scenes/lighting, the no meter thing is feasible. But for photographing when the light becomes interesting (dawn and dusk), I think a meter is very handy. But that is just me, I am no genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 my opinion, you shouldn't have to be forced to use filters or slow film or any other comprimise becasue of the limitations (shutter speed in this case) of a film body. it's the glass i crave. yet one has to stick it on a body that doesn't let you, in some cases, use the sweet part of the lens, or the f stop that you may want, becasue of the body's limits? seems dumb that most important instrument of making the image is hindered the least import instrument? leica's are for the dark. slr's are for the light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Never owned a meter myself. You mean there's supposed to be one inside my camera? Are you sure it's not meant for spying on me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terry_rory Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 My camera has a meter, it works so I use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 If I have to work fast outdoors, I use the sunny f16 rule and adjust on the fly depending on the direction and intensity of the light. However, I am rarely working so fast that I don't have time to take at least one or two readings. Why rely on the latitude of your film when you have the time and the tools to be more precise? I would much rather get it right the first time than try to salvage something in the shop. I generally carry a Minolta 1-degree spot meter and a Gossen Sixtronic with incident capability along with the bodies, either meterless, or with on-board meter. At times, even with the M6 or Bessa R2 onboard meter, I find myself using the handheld spot or incident meters. Under certain circumstances, an incident meter is your best friend. Take an incident reading in a situation where the light is of fairly even distribution and intensity and it can serve you very well. Even in a location where you have several "zones" or areas of relatively homogenous lighting, taking an incident reading in each zone can give you bang-on exposure and help you work faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanmoran Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 I went through a phase of not using a meter with my M2 and M3. It does educate your eye and certainly forces you to be more attuned to the light. The downside though is in the darkroom: instead of most negs requiring the same enlarger exposure-time, there is much more of a variation from one neg to the next. After compensating in the darkroom, most of my estimates yielded technically good prints, but took more attempts to arrive at this acceptable standard. These are 'work prints' I'm talking about. For a later fibre-based print of the best work, I'm willing to take my time, but when it comes to churning out a couple of dozen prints (to live with for a while before deciding what to print to a higher standard) I don't want to mess about in the darkroom more than I have to. So, what it boils down to is this: do you save five seconds by not taking a meter-reading, if this means an extra ten minutes' work on the print in the darkroom? Or do you take a reading (and perhaps modify it by using a bit of photographic intelligence) thus minimising the time later to be spent printing it. This is analogous to studio engineers capturing a good performance versus 'fixing it in the mix'. Of course, if something amazing is happening in front of you and there isn't time, then shooting first and measuring the light later is the best strategy. Best wishes, Sean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTC Photography Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Occasionally do so with Leica IIIc, Minox IIIs or Edixa 16M. However the exposures on a film strip are quite uneven. I prefer to use camera with build in meter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Sean Moran wrote: " So, what it boils down to is this: do you save five seconds by not taking a meter-reading, if this means an extra ten minutes' work on the print in the darkroom? Or do you take a reading (and perhaps modify it by using a bit of photographic intelligence) thus minimising the time later to be spent printing it." Agreed, but there is another dimension to the choice ... I think you save the time up front if it means the difference between catching the picture and losing it. Otherwise, it's far better to get it right up front. A lot of people assume they can save a shot in the darkroom or the shop, and it is not always so. A lot of people assume that latitude is a fixed number of stops and it isn't ... I view it as the ratio of the tonal range of the film to the tonal range of a scene, and for a given film, that ratio changes as the tonal range of the scene changes. You cannot be certain of a fixed amount of exposure latitude. Some scenes have such a wide range that you have what I would call "negative latitude" ... you cannot possibly capture the scene's full range with your given film and something, shadows or highlights, has to be sacrificed. In such cases, there is little or nothing you can do in the darkroom to save the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilan_g Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 <b>Question:</b> <i>Anyone shooting without a meter? </i><p><b>Answer:</b> Dick Cheney.<p>Sorry, couldn't resist... :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wdavidprice Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 I think it all boils down to experience...the human eye/brain has the potential of beating the pants off any light meter. But it takes a lot of practice. I use a M2 or IIIc and a red scale elmar with Tri-X 400. If I can't capture with that combo I do without it. I used to carry a laminated card that I had with settings for outside on one side and settings for inside on the other. But after several years I stopped using it and now if I'm not sure I bracket...film is cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_senzaorbi Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 "I have used an M6 with its built in meter, but often prefer not using the meter, and take the battery out. Reflective meters are very convenient, but they can be distracting ,and I often find that I miss a fleeting shot because the reading in the camera indicates an exposure adjustment is necessary." Studying exposure theory and understanding how the meter works and what it sees so you know when to follow it and when not to takes more effort than taking the batteries out but less effort than trying to learn how to guess exposures accurately no matter what the lighting. Of course if you only shoot outdoors in the daytime and use C-41 film rated a stop or two slower than advertized, then by following the little diagram inside the film box (an expansion of Sunny-16) you will probably get printable albeit not ideal results almost all of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 "the human eye/brain has the potential of beating the pants off any light meter." Not sure I agree with this. The human eye (at a young age) seems to have virtually infinite depth of field, a pupil that dilates automatically to compensate for varying light levels, and is hooked up to a brain that automatically compensates for changes in light levels and focus as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_c2 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 I used a meterless Leica for a few years. Just walk around with your Digisix and size up the lighting for yourself; guesstimate as you happen on to different lit areas, always comparing to that first light reading. If you forget/have doubts, simply meter again. As others have said, it becomes intuitive after a while. I do indeed think that your mind can work faster than a meter after much light evaluation. There are really only around 13 readings to memorize (with their subsequent permutations; i.e. sunny f/16 w/ TX= f/11@1/1000; =f/8@1/2000th, etc.) from the most brightly lit scenes to a candlelit scene. If you use b&w film, it is soooooo forgiving! In that way, it bends digital over its knee and gives it a good spanking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry_kincaid1 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Once I was outside with my M6ttl and the batteries went dead, and for the first time in 3 years I was not carrying a backup. Remembered the sunny 16 rule, so I went ahead and tried it. Kinda fun for a change. Every exosure (color film) turned out fine. So, I now see for myself what some are saying up above. But I'm back to the internal meter out of habit and perhaps laziness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erin.e Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Oh well, I've had my laughing fit for the day, I won't be rude boys, and pull your willies. Quite a few of the luddites in this thread are already doing that :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee_shively Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 A meter is not a necessity for every situation. The only film I use in 35mm is Ilford HP5+. I know this film. I seldom need to meter a scene to know the exposure. Try shooting a Holga for a while. It has no real adjustments. You'll be amazed at how much latitude film has and how easy it is to get acceptable exposures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasper1 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 I won't be rude boys, and pull your willies You will need very big hands sweetheart to handle my mean machine. If you are moving fast and furious either it's full auto, or, what's a meter maid. Buy an M7 and be a cross dresser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now