mdarnton
Well-known
Wait a minute...... Some people think they can focus without a rangefinder? What kind of inept incompetent no-talent bonehead would try something like that!!!?? This calls for another thread!!!!
Richard G
Veteran
Is there a metering thread on RFF that doesn't have at least 100 posts? I love metering threads, as Homer might say.
As was pointed out, most of us are saying the same thing in different ways. None of us claims not to need a meter. We began with that difficult scene of the OP's and how to meter it. Many of us thought better not to use a meter, in that particular situation.
There is a lot of good information in this thread, not so much how to shoot without a meter at all, but how to use a meter and not to be slavishly dependent on it, not because that's fun or a sign of manhood, but because it is essential to getting a good photograph, a good exposure, where the settings on the camera are more from experience than from the LCD/needle readout of the meter.
One myth I dismissed years ago was how a good meter was essential to expose Kodachrome. I spent a month on holiday, in summer admittedly, without a meter. But for Kodachrome I found Sunny 16 worked extremely well. And indeed, it is not as if Kodak dropped their box end exposure guide for Kodachrome 64 or Kodachrome 25 film rolls. "You keep the box-end, and we've already done the rest for you." to paraphrase Eastman.
As was pointed out, most of us are saying the same thing in different ways. None of us claims not to need a meter. We began with that difficult scene of the OP's and how to meter it. Many of us thought better not to use a meter, in that particular situation.
There is a lot of good information in this thread, not so much how to shoot without a meter at all, but how to use a meter and not to be slavishly dependent on it, not because that's fun or a sign of manhood, but because it is essential to getting a good photograph, a good exposure, where the settings on the camera are more from experience than from the LCD/needle readout of the meter.
One myth I dismissed years ago was how a good meter was essential to expose Kodachrome. I spent a month on holiday, in summer admittedly, without a meter. But for Kodachrome I found Sunny 16 worked extremely well. And indeed, it is not as if Kodak dropped their box end exposure guide for Kodachrome 64 or Kodachrome 25 film rolls. "You keep the box-end, and we've already done the rest for you." to paraphrase Eastman.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
But if you don't play, you can't win. Which is better: risking 1/8 or even 1/4 and maybe getting a picture, or saying, "NO! No-one can hold 1/8 or 1/4" and ruling out any possibility of a picture?
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
A thread be damned! What's wrong with indefinite incarceration without trial?
Cheers,
R.
Richard G
Veteran
Another thing that's come up is shutter speed. Some of my favourite recent photos are taken with a Leica II whose slowest shutter speed is 1/20s as mentioned above. But I needed 1/4s. So I guessed it and suffered the unavoidable camera movement entailed in two movements and the long exposure. But for head shots this added a wonderful quality to the result. I will often hand hold slow when I need to or want to and when sharpness is not crucial. I have a photo of two friends in a night club taken at 1/2s, my head and their's anchored against the back of our seats. It's always a shame to hear someone didn't even try for the shot because the light was too low.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Solinar
Analog Preferred
Nokton48
Veteran
Interesting to read some of the reactions.
I think it can be an acquired skill. The world famous architectural photographer Peter Aaron comes to my mind, who NEVER uses a meter and is shooting very expensive LF film in commercial architectural interior shoots. Just the effect of light on the eyeball and acquired experience.
http://www.peteraaron.net/
Jim Marshall is another that comes to mind, who had acquired this skill. TomA once wrote that they played a little game one evening, TomA with meter, Jim with just his acquired eye. He was almost always right on the nose, as I remember. Absolutely Uncanny.
http://www.jimmarshallphotographyllc.com/
I think it can be an acquired skill. The world famous architectural photographer Peter Aaron comes to my mind, who NEVER uses a meter and is shooting very expensive LF film in commercial architectural interior shoots. Just the effect of light on the eyeball and acquired experience.
http://www.peteraaron.net/
Jim Marshall is another that comes to mind, who had acquired this skill. TomA once wrote that they played a little game one evening, TomA with meter, Jim with just his acquired eye. He was almost always right on the nose, as I remember. Absolutely Uncanny.
http://www.jimmarshallphotographyllc.com/
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
I've got scores of perfectly exposed rolls of slide film that suggest you're selectively ignoring any data that doesn't shore up your personal opinion on the matter.
CMur12
Veteran
I've got scores of perfectly exposed rolls of slide film that suggest you're selectively ignoring any data that doesn't shore up your personal opinion on the matter.
I'm impressed if you have scores of perfectly exposed rolls of slide film and you used no meter.
I've shot slides for many years, but it never occurred to me that it would be desirable to learn to shoot without a meter. My emphasis was always how to get the most out of my meters for total control.
I started with the TTL averaging meters in my 35mm SLRs. Then I thought that a spot meter would really be nice, so I eventually got a spot meter to complement the in-camera meters. I also got an incident light meter and I went so far as to get a flat disc diffuser for it, so that I could better assess directional light in windowlight portraiture. When I got TLRs with no in-camera meters, I just used my handheld meters. The exception is the Minolta Autocord CdS-III that has a built-in semi-spot meter that is incredibly accurate. I never bother to use the handheld meters with this camera.- Murray
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Shooting with no meter is a little like going commando ... ok until you have a serious misjudgement!
pyeh
Member of good standing
Like Richard G, I remember relying on the little cartoons inside the Kodak box with Kodachrome 25 and 64. I was using a Rollei 35 at the time too, so between estimating exposure and distance it's a wonder that I has so many acceptable slides. Since I've been using auto exposure on my current cameras for so long I've completely lost any ability to estimate light levels by eye, and with digital sensors and processing being as capable as they are, it's not even as if you have to meter that accurately at all these days (within limits).
Michael Markey
Veteran
Shooting with no meter is a little like going commando ... ok until you have a serious misjudgement!
Too funny Keith
But here`s the rub ...
As Roger has suggested it`s better to play but some folk will be more sensitive to misjudgements than others.
That`s the real issue here .
Sure if I`d misjudged the exposure I`d wish that I hadn`t but if I got the shot it wouldn`t bother me.
Provided that it was acceptable ... to me.
Sparrow
Veteran
... ones of my best photos is spoiled by a bit of camera shake ... now it lurks in my files and mocks me each time I come across it ... anyway how-slow-can-you-go is just another interweb pissing contest we mislead newcomers with, personaly I should stick to 1/lens-length as I spoil shots at 1/30 sometimes
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
I'm impressed if you have scores of perfectly exposed rolls of slide film and you used no meter.
I've shot slides for many years, but it never occurred to me that it would be desirable to learn to shoot without a meter. My emphasis was always how to get the most out of my meters for total control.
- Murray
Untitled by berangberang, on FlickrI find that exposing slides is not too difficult if you keep in mind that whatever choice you make in exposure is what you have to live with, and that inevitably you will come across scenes where you are going to have to choose for instance between shadow detail or a blown out sky - and that sometimes you may have to settle for loss of shadow detail and a blown out sky.
The "trick" then is to just expose for your subject and let everything else fall where it may. In this sense shooting slides is much less bother than dealing with print film. Shooting slides is all about choosing your battle.
Untitled by berangberang, on Flickr
bottle by berangberang, on FlickrThe most typical problem is underexposing - having the camera "maxed out" at the largest aperture and slowest shutter speeds but still not having enough light - but this is also a problem if you have a meter but still want to get a shot, any shot, anyway.
When I began shooting slide film I was certain I needed a meter - and I used one. But as I continued on I often went out without a meter and used cameras that had no meter, and more often than not the photos still turned out the way I envisioned them. I have nothing against using meters. Not using them does not make one smarter, or craftier. But you can still make good photos without one.
KM-25
Well-known
Gotta love the chest pounding antics of the photo interwebs eh, always good for a laugh....
Back when I was in my early 20's, I was mentored by a fairly successful wedding and portrait shooter. While not a genre I chose for my career, I learned a lot, including how to read all kinds of light, indoors and out. It got to the point where we would make bets on what the exposure was. After awhile, I got good at it, usually within a stop which was fairly safe for color neg film..
Fast forward to now. Even though I own 6 meters, one IR specific and two Zone Studios modded Pentax spot, I only really use a couple of tiny Gossen Digisix meters, they read in EV which I now actually prefer.
But you know what....? I rarely even need those as I have about a 90% hit rate to be within a half a stop. After decades of shooting and *really* understanding how light works, I have turned into a human light meter.
Now, I only shoot black and white but I shoot a good variety of it from ISO 1 ( Efke IR 820 ) to Tmax 400 pushed to 1,600. One of the reasons I rely on my experience even when I have a meter handy is that I can not exactly run over and stick a meter in the face of say, Secretary Jeh Johnson when he has different light on him than where I am standing even with a meter in my hand.
So hundreds of thousands of photos and about 50,000 hours later, you bet your sweet Sekonic meter that I can read light well enough to not need one. Believe it, some of us just can...
tomtofa
Well-known
Shooting with no meter is a little like going commando ... ok until you have a serious misjudgement!
I seem to remember you got some great pictures from that . . . but maybe they were metered?
Solinar
Analog Preferred
Shooting with no meter is a little like going commando ... ok until you have a serious misjudgement!
Sort of like Robert Capa on the beach during D-Day in 1944 with all the incoming fire from the German positions. I wonder if he was paying much attention to the meter that day?
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
1. The whole point of trying to prove that someone CAN estimate the light by showing pics here is logically incorrect. The question is not whether SOMETIMES or even OFTEN you can guess it right (which i don't doubt), which you can prove with a few shots. The question is whether you reliably, always can guesstimate it (so that you don't lose important shots, or whatever your reason).
This you could only prove by showing us ALL your shots. Also the ones that got edited and thrown out during those many years of shooting.
2. Tunalegs, you are illustrating your point by showing OUTDOOR slides (again). Completely missing the OP's point.
C'mon.
3. Also the Capa reference is nonsense since he was shooting outdoors plus he was shooting BW film (plus the technical results are awful).
4. Furthermore none says you should trust meters blindly, that's also an irrelevant argument. Of course you should not. Just like driving a car helps getting from a point to another quicker but you still need to drive the thing.
Anyway, shoot the way that makes you happy. Just be careful with advices.
This you could only prove by showing us ALL your shots. Also the ones that got edited and thrown out during those many years of shooting.
2. Tunalegs, you are illustrating your point by showing OUTDOOR slides (again). Completely missing the OP's point.
C'mon.
3. Also the Capa reference is nonsense since he was shooting outdoors plus he was shooting BW film (plus the technical results are awful).
4. Furthermore none says you should trust meters blindly, that's also an irrelevant argument. Of course you should not. Just like driving a car helps getting from a point to another quicker but you still need to drive the thing.
Anyway, shoot the way that makes you happy. Just be careful with advices.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
who's pounding chests here??