Making Exposures (Shooting) Through a Window

[peter_gale]

<p>It is getting cold here (around freezing) and becoming colder, with fewer and fewer opportunities to remain outside to photograph autumn colours. No snow as yet, but the late-autumn colours and shadow forms are still very, very interesting. I have always been inclined to use my 500C/M to take shots from inside my living area (during the day) to capture (1) the plants (and their strangely expressive forms) that are now sitting inside on the window sill, but in full sun; and (2) shots of nearby shrubbery and young trees, which are just outside, but throwing up interesting shadows across the late autumn ground. In the past, I have used my Sekonic meter to take incident and spot readings of each subject, and depending on the readings, will 'average' them, with the idea that I'll get a relatively good indication of the light on each subject. I can walk right up to the window sill for an incident reading of the plant forms in that subject matter, and take an incident reading against the window for outdoor scenes. I then compare these reading to a reflected spot reading of each subject (which tends to be higher in each case). The results that follow seem OK, but I'm wondering if I'm doing it all wrong.<br>

I am particularly interested in the shots take from inside a room (where there is just the natural light of the morning or day, and it is less bright than outside) and the readings I might/should be using from the meter to take a subject that is outside, through, and beyond the window.<br>

Over the years, I've looked for answers, here, online, and in sources I have at home. But none provides an answer that seems just right for my situation (although many directions/opinions are related). If this question doesn't seem redundant, I'd appreciate any response or advice you might have. </p>

[frank uhlig]

<p>If you stand in the shade of an umbrella and measure the direct sunlit beach beyond the umbrella, will the reading change if you hold the meter onto the same sand on the beach after having stepped out of the shade?<br>

If you meter the sand under the sunshade where you stand and then step out from under the umbrella and point to the shaded sand under the umbrella, will the reading change?<br>

What do you think are the answers?<br>

What do your pictures/film tell you? What is a light meter measuring?<br>

Tell us what is right in these situations, what is happening and why you worry, and about what, and last but not least what your film shows in failed exposures ... or does it not? </p>

<p>Think this one through and use reason and do experiment with your light readings from a dark room into a bright one, inside the same bright one, the reverse, etc etc. You have ample time indoors now that it has turned cold. Be scientific and learn to understand ...<br>

At the sunlit moon surface, what would you expose your film at? The same or differently than in the Sonora desert on a sunny day?</p>

 

[peter_gale]

<p>Frank, for some reason my initial response, and thanks to you, has not been posted as yet. Anyway, again, you put forward some good 'metering' questions. As my original post indicated, I am particularly interested in shots from my interior to subjects outdoors. I have gone outside to compare readings there to readings from my interior (where the camera would be located), and have wondered, to what extent (if any at all), the glass window pane itself acts like a 'filter' and might be a factor affecting the readings taken indoors (the glass is clean!). I have always assumed that the clear glass is not a factor, but, as I contemplate this situation again, I wonder.</p>

[russ_britt3]

<p>With a incident meter you need to be in the same light that is falling on your subject. Example- a far out mountain top that is in bright sun, and a spot in the parking lot that is in bright sun- will have the same exposure reading.<br>

But a reflective meter is a different creature, all you have to do is to point it at the subject to meter the subject.<br>

But you have to remember that most all meter are set up for 18% gray scale.<br>

Fred Picker has the best book I have ever read about metering....(Zone VI Workshop). Its simpler to understand than Ansel Adams books, his are a lot more detailed.</p>

[frank uhlig]

<p>So, if the window glass all by itself cuts 10% of the outside light off, then reading from where you are taking the picture through the glass will a) measure the light the camera receives accurately (90 % of what is actually outside, a TTL type measurement indeed) and b) will alter the exposure insignificantly (if only 50% passes through the window this means one stop loss of light. so 10% pass-through loss is a smidgin of a stop = never mind).</p>

<p>So simply forget your worry, especially as you have never noticed any effect on your films, have you? right?! </p>

<p>[Or - maybe - is the camera set up outside and you measure and transmit that info somehow from the inside to the outside ??? Well that would only change exposure by a mere 10% (say), so why worry about less than a third of a stop?]</p>

[peter_gale]

<p>Thanks Russ. A good recommendation, one that I didn't know. The readings of outdoor subjects taken through my window using the reflective mode tend to be virtually the same as those incident readings taken outside between the camera lens (still inside) and the meter (which is then held close to the subject). So, when inside, I tend to assume that the incident readings (lower) were 'informed' by that somewhat 'duller/darker' location inside. As a consequence, I favored the reflective reading in my final reading, with some considerations.<br>

Nevertheless, I have often wondered if the glass pane, even if very clean, acts somewhat like a 'filter' and the reflective readings should be adjusted in some way. I have assumed that the glass is not a factor, but each year, I wonder.... And I do have several gray cards, and must perform some experiments with them. Thanks again. </p>

[peter_gale]

<p>Frank, that's very helpful. If I sound repetitive to Russ, it's because I was interrupted by a phone call and didn't see your second response until now. So, given the speed that my question provokes, thanks to everyone!</p>