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!!!!
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?A 1/15th of second is about as low I'll go. Even at 1/30th of second, I prefer lean into a wall or a pole for steadiness. The old Barnack that I have only goes down to 1/20th of second.
P.S. - I do believe in good timers and thermometers for the darkroom - but if I'm discussing exposure, I try not mention the inherent risks of scale focusing with a Rollei 35. :angel:
A thread be damned! What's wrong with indefinite incarceration without trial?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!!!!
Dear Richard,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.
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.
That photo proves me right...
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. 😉
Shooting with no meter is a little like going commando ... ok until you have a serious misjudgement! 😀
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.
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
Untitled by berangberang, on Flickr
Untitled by berangberang, on Flickr
bottle by berangberang, on FlickrYou can't guesstimate indoors. You just can't.
You can remember the values if it's your home and you metered it several times in the same condition, but you cannot guesstimate it otherwise.
Shooting with no meter is a little like going commando ... ok until you have a serious misjudgement! 😀
Shooting with no meter is a little like going commando ... ok until you have a serious misjudgement! 😀
Gotta love the chest pounding antics of the photo interwebs eh, always good for a laugh....