First time going full manual

[schow]

since one of my GIII QL17l's ight meter is on the fritz, I decided to shoot full manual without any light meter whatsoever. On the link below are some of the "good" ones. I'd appreciate it if any of you could give me some feedback.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=6065

if some of you are really feeling generous, than I can also post the "bad" ones too.


Thanks
Sherm

 

[back alley]

those exposures look good, but it also depends on what effect you were trying for.
if what you got is what you wanted then you are doing great.

if you were looking for something else then you need to work on it.

 

[Stanton]

I think the exposures look great. Dave

 

[schow]

I honestly think that in these 5 photos, I captured what I actually saw with the naked eye, which is what I was intending. I was not going for any sort of neat effects just the "correct" exposure.

I think maybe I should post the "bad" ones. I'll probably gain more knowledge from those criticisims....

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

those exposures look accurate.

what was your rate of accurate to inaccurate exposure shots, by the way?

 

[lynn]

I think you did very well indeed. Sunny 16 is one thing, indoor studio-type work another completely. I particularly like Manual #1: the composition is harmonious and the curves are nicely balanced by the stripes and angles of the shadows.

 

[schow]

it was a 12 exposure roll of polaroid iso 200 with an unknown expiration date. I shot all 12 of them indoors around the same time, 7pm-7:20pm EST, here in FL.

I think I may gotten 1/2 of them "correct".

I'm posting the rest of them now, and it should be all of them by tomorrow.

The ones I'm least happy with are "not so good1", "not so good2", and "bad eggs".

 

[captainslack]

I stopped cursing at my ql17 when I went full manual with it. IMHO, they're better cameras without the light meter.

 

[ampguy]

interesting

interesting

I got a couple of pics with similar whitish grain of your bad eggs pic. I wonder if that is just a characteristic of this lens, or maybe the canonet needs a lens hood in certain light situations?

Maybe it's because we're both using old cheap film too?? I've got 2 rolls taken with new film (fuji 200 color print film) to develop today that will tell me if it's a film issue, and also how the meter works. I use the meter, and them manually set the aperture. An added benefit is by leaving it off A, you'll save your battery!!

it was a 12 exposure roll of polaroid iso 200 with an unknown expiration date. I shot all 12 of them indoors around the same time, 7pm-7:20pm EST, here in FL.

I think I may gotten 1/2 of them "correct".

I'm posting the rest of them now, and it should be all of them by tomorrow.

The ones I'm least happy with are "not so good1", "not so good2", and "bad eggs".

 

[John Shriver]

Ampguy,

The bad eggs picture isn't any sort of lens problem -- it's just the classic look of underexposed C-41 color negative film.

 

[BrianShaw]

I'm hungry now. Were those chocolate chip cookies?

 

[ErnestoJL]

The only that shows bad exposure is bad eggs. All the other pictures are quite good for them being the first attempt meterless.

Ernesto

 

[sf]

schow, looks like you have a good eye for difficult metering. I could never do that.

 

[schow]

ampguy,
John Shriver is right about that underexposure. But what's interesting to me is that "manual 3" (red table, cookies n' milk) is shot at almost the same time of day and same exposure (1/250 f/8) as "bad eggs", but "manual 3" is correct. 😕

BrianShaw,
those cookies are actually oatmeal raisin. They're not chocolate chip, but they are good. 🙂


Everyone else,
Thanks for the encouragement and compliments.

Sherm

 

[ampguy]

Thanks John and Schow. I'm pretty far from trying to go manual, but I did get the results back from my 2nd roll through my QL17, and I'm really pleased. The new Fuji 200 print film looks very good, with little grain relative to my first roll. I bracketed several shots and on the computer from the photocd, it's hard to tell the difference, but I'm going to set my ASA at half to overexpose a full stop, and basically stop comparing the metering of the Canon to other cameras, and just use it the way it is. I'm pleased with it, and even went back to a 400 roll to see what it can do with a bit of overexposure.