Anyone getting by without a lightmeter?

pvdhaar

pvdhaar

Peter
Local time
8:09 AM
Joined
Dec 8, 2003
Messages
3,395
Couple of weeks ago, I dug out the film rangefinders from the attic, after having shot digital exclusively for 6 months or so. In the mean time I sold my light meter along with the 6x6 system.

But wouldn't you know.. of course one of the RFs doesn't sport a meter (leica m4 by the way). Shouldn't be a problem of course, as every film comes in a cardboard box with a little exposure guide inside. Well, that's how it used to be. Not anymore.

I looked around on the web, but all the exposure guides I could find are textually prolific, which isn't my ideal when I'm out there concentrating on shooting. Well, I spent some quality time making those little pictorgrams myself for 1/ISO shutter speed.

So for anyone else looking for something similar, I'll attach my creative efforts..
 

Attachments

  • Exposure guide.jpg
    Exposure guide.jpg
    15.4 KB · Views: 0
Ash said:
You left an M4 in the ATTIC?!?!?!?! :eek:
Click to expand...
I hardly even dare to tell you how I left it there.. (in a cardboard box between old power sockets and extension cords). Well, we all learn, don't we? :eek:
 
Good job. After not having a meter for years, I bought one last year. Then I left it in a pocket when I did my laundry. So am again without a meter. Once you get the hang of it, working meterless isn't really that difficult. Most photos before 1950 were taken without a meter.
 
finally i have a camera with a meter in it. and what a bunch of crap it tries to feed me. best not to look at it. and one has to appreciate the exp latitute of c41...
 
Meters - they can get tedious, but I quite like my Lunasix 3 which is almost as big as most modern P&S Digitals

I always say the small digital P&S Cameras make great light meters - at least you can preview your shot before you take it with a "proper" camera
 
I'm teaching myself to get along without one. I've shot a roll for the Pass the RF 3 round here in Tashkent on a meterless FED-2, and it's working out nicely so far.
 
rxmd said:
I'm teaching myself to get along without one. I've shot a roll for the Pass the RF 3 round here in Tashkent on a meterless FED-2, and it's working out nicely so far.
Click to expand...

I think you are on the right track. From time to time I stop using my meter and go strictly by experience for determining exposure. After awhile I do check the meter to gauge my estimates. I'm usually no more than a stop off unless the lighting is tricky/high contrast. As I shoot mostly b&w,and tend to overexpose, this falls well within the dynamic range of modern b&w films.

Besides, there is nothing like shooting with a rf using 100% of your experience and senses to capture an image.

Best regards,

Bob
 
rpsawin said:
I think you are on the right track. From time to time I stop using my meter and go strictly by experience for determining exposure. After awhile I do check the meter to gauge my estimates. I'm usually no more than a stop off unless the lighting is tricky/high contrast. As I shoot mostly b&w,and tend to overexpose, this falls well within the dynamic range of modern b&w films.

Besides, there is nothing like shooting with a rf using 100% of your experience and senses to capture an image.

Best regards,

Bob
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more!!

Shooting meterless is one of the highlights in my whole photography experience so far. It's completely unintuitive that using your brain to approximate the amount of light entering a camera can be so satisfying.

This is one of my recent meterless shots, as far as tricky lighting goes, I have to compensate a bit to capture the details in the shady areas without blowing off the highlights on the leaves too much: 1/250 f8 on ASA 100 film (my baseline is the Sunny-16 Rule)

502969989_4eefba5b35.jpg
 
Way back before meters, I was taught to evaluate light using shadow densities and squint factors; even with a meterless camera, a small incident meter usually goes along to check the estimates.
 
I can do both. I have a meter-less RF, But I have a Small shoe mount Vivitar CDS meter I use or not. (typically, I may it if my subject is back-lit or there is weird lighting, I will walk up and take reading)

But Film has a nice leeway of +/- 1.5EV, Using the sunny 16 works just fine. And with my RF, I typically use the Hyper-focus marks on the lens anyway.

(well, my RF is off a little, When I had a collapsible lens on it..I did not know the routine when and when not to collapse it. So, it knocked the INF &/or Close focus out. :bang: ).

Oh well, the RF is just a guide anyway. If it gets OOW (Out Of Whack), the lens is not effected. But I digress

With my Zorki 1, I like the whole experience most of the time too....all brain to determine exposure, composition, and focus.

PS: thanks for the Grapic Guide :)
 
If I'm going to be shooting in a circumstance that doesn't really lend itself to metering, I'll do some preliminary metering of the general area, and then guesstimate from there once I actually start. Generally speaking though, I don't go meterless unless the camera is so hopelessy primitive that you couldn't do anything with the meter readings anyhow.
 
Lately I've been giving a good try with a TLR which I've had for a couple years and not really used. It doesn't have a meter. and I've found that I can indeed get normal looking negatives using only this carbon-based natural lightmeter (actually I have 2 of them) that I've had for some time. In other words I've looked and guessed. :)

Here's the thread with some of the first shots:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40934

My issues with this camera are not exposure related. My current avatar was gonna be a self-portrait with the TLR, but I forgot to wind and double-exposed one of the park scenes on it. Just thinking 120 instead of thinking 35 is my challenge.
 
My Photo teacher in high school trained us to use the "Mark I eyeball meter". Mrs.Wismer gave us Nikon S (yea, really!) rangefinder cameras, Tri-X film and these instructions:

" shoot f16 at 1/125th for outdoors, f2.8 at 1/60th for indoors. Film's cheap so bracket like heck"

Most of the photos in the yearbook were shot this way. I still can pretty accurately meter most any scene well enough to make a useable image. I have, however, recently picked up aGossen Luna-Pro for really contrasty situations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom