kennylovrin
Well-known
Hey
After developing a few different b&w films myself and had one color neg film developed by a lab I'm now starting to realize that my shot basically always comes out underexposed. At first I wasn't sure if I was doing something wrong with the development, but comparing my own negs with the ones from the lab it seems pretty consistently underexposed by the same amount.
So this probably means one of two things. Either I am making "exactly" the same mistake with every shot, or my M6 doesn't meter properly.
I will compare the meter to the spot and center weighted mode on my canon dslr to see if they are even in the same ballpark, but until then I have one question..
I have no idea how old the batteries in the camera are. If they are running out, could that cause the meter to meter higher so that it leads me to underexpose the shot? Somehow I would imagine it to be the other way around.
I don't think it's a faulty iso dial at least, because I get kind of the same problem both with 100 and 400 film.
Or is it probably just me messing it up? I wouldn't expect it to be so consistent if it was though, I'd expect it to be all over the place.
Thanks!
After developing a few different b&w films myself and had one color neg film developed by a lab I'm now starting to realize that my shot basically always comes out underexposed. At first I wasn't sure if I was doing something wrong with the development, but comparing my own negs with the ones from the lab it seems pretty consistently underexposed by the same amount.
So this probably means one of two things. Either I am making "exactly" the same mistake with every shot, or my M6 doesn't meter properly.
I will compare the meter to the spot and center weighted mode on my canon dslr to see if they are even in the same ballpark, but until then I have one question..
I have no idea how old the batteries in the camera are. If they are running out, could that cause the meter to meter higher so that it leads me to underexpose the shot? Somehow I would imagine it to be the other way around.
I don't think it's a faulty iso dial at least, because I get kind of the same problem both with 100 and 400 film.
Or is it probably just me messing it up? I wouldn't expect it to be so consistent if it was though, I'd expect it to be all over the place.
Thanks!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Kenny,
Halve the ISO setting on the camera.
A lot depend on where you point the camera when you're metering. And on the metering pattern/weighting.
Cheers,
R.
Halve the ISO setting on the camera.
A lot depend on where you point the camera when you're metering. And on the metering pattern/weighting.
Cheers,
R.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Above is right, if you don't have a hand meter; borrow one. Then compare with your on camera meter. You should really try to fix this as you will never be happy until you do. Roger Hicks' website (above) has a great section on metering.
Nokton48
Veteran
I never underexpose. Although I have calibrated my meters so they all match, I normally make an exposure first at the indicated reading. If it is a worthy, repeatable event, I shoot a second frame, adding 1 f/stop of exposure. If I really want to cover myself (you never know until you see the film) I make a third exposure, adding two f/stops.
It is good to give yourself a choice, and you will will learn after getting feedback what really works for you.
It is good to give yourself a choice, and you will will learn after getting feedback what really works for you.
kennylovrin
Well-known
But what is it you guys are sayin really? That it doesn't matter if the meter is accurate or not, what matters is only how I should rate the film depending on my tendencies for metering?
I understand the concept of rating the film differently than the box speed, but it's not completely clear to me when to do it. By the sound of your replies it seems as I should always do it?
It could very well be that when I meter shadows I don't meter as deep shadows as the next guy, so I can see how that would give me underexposed shots if I just meter and "stop down two stops". It has actually struck my mind that this could be the case.
I understand the concept of rating the film differently than the box speed, but it's not completely clear to me when to do it. By the sound of your replies it seems as I should always do it?
It could very well be that when I meter shadows I don't meter as deep shadows as the next guy, so I can see how that would give me underexposed shots if I just meter and "stop down two stops". It has actually struck my mind that this could be the case.
ferider
Veteran
1) If you have a classic, early M6, yes, meters can go strange.
2) replace the batteries, they are easy to find.
3) compare to a known good meter and with a grey card. The M6 meter might have a different color response than you reference. (I know my M6 is quite yellow/red sensitive).
2) replace the batteries, they are easy to find.
3) compare to a known good meter and with a grey card. The M6 meter might have a different color response than you reference. (I know my M6 is quite yellow/red sensitive).
Lawrence A.
Established
A simple fix, of course, once you are sure your metering technique is OK, is to lower the rating of the film you are using. As long as the meter is consistently off (and you can check that by metering a solid wall and changing iso and noting exposue changes) that is a very simple and workable fix. I find almost all film is rated higher I like for the negatives I want. I once had a large format lens that was consistently 2/3 of a stop off, at every aperture and all shutter speeds. I simply noted that anomaly, compensated for it, and kept using the lens as it was, getting good and consistent results from it. Good luck.
f6andBthere
Well-known
Learn sunny sixteen and treat your meter as a guide ... not the gospel.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
yes, Yes, YES! determine the exposure using your brain and your meter as a good input.
If you do not understand "Sunny 16", read up on it. It will give you very accurate exposures regardless of what your meter says.
Teuthida
Well-known
you are under exposing every shot. Let's assume it's two stops, and you meter is simply "fast" by two stops. To automatically correct for this, set your ISO at one-fourth the box speed (eg. 100 with 400 iso, 50 with 200 Iso etc) because that will, in effect, tell the meter to meter 2 stops more exposure to every picture you take, thus giving you correct exposure. think about it.
goffer
Well-known
This is what I do as well keeping my hand meter in a nearby pocket, just in case
venchka
Veteran
I guess nobody does any testing to determine their own personal exposure index for a given meter/shutter/film/developer/personal style? My number for HP5+ is 250. Fomapan 200 is 100. Color negative film Always at half box speed.
You could point the meter at detailed shadows and close 1 stop instead of 2. That equals half box speed. More or less.
Or you could buy a Sherry Krauter calibrated M5.
Wayne
You could point the meter at detailed shadows and close 1 stop instead of 2. That equals half box speed. More or less.
Or you could buy a Sherry Krauter calibrated M5.
Wayne
charjohncarter
Veteran
Yes, very good, test, test, and then verify. But do it or you will never get where you want to be. B&W film is forgiving and if you send it out you will never get consistent results. So either have somebody develop that you trust or do it yourself. If you shoot C-41 then check your metering.
By the way, if you are tempted to go digital that may be the best answer: but a very mediocre one.
Dwig
Well-known
If the error is uniform across different film types (e.g. B&W, Color Neg, ...) and across a wide range of subject brightnesses (e.g. full sun, shade, low light) then one "fix" is to always lie to the meter when setting the ISO.
When doing the "compare to a known accurate meter", if you use an SLR for the comparison be sure to use a prime (fixed focal length) lens rather than a zoom. Zooms tend to have much larger differences between their f/stops and their T-stops (effective transmittion), frequently 1/2 stop and sometimes a full stop. With primes the difference is usually too small to matter.
edge100
Well-known
The easiest solution to this issue (after you've had the M6 meter checked out) is to rate your film below box speed; the actual amount needs to be determined based on the specific film.
Another option is to always meter for the shadows, since you know your film will hold the highlights.
My other advise would be to learn to shoot without your meter. It's really not difficult, especially outdoors, once you've gotten some practice.
Another option is to always meter for the shadows, since you know your film will hold the highlights.
My other advise would be to learn to shoot without your meter. It's really not difficult, especially outdoors, once you've gotten some practice.
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
I also agree on this. It has worked for me for years now. Learn to read the light.
RObert Budding
D'oh!
How are you determining that your shots are underexposed? Are you looking at the shadow areas of your negs, I hope?
kennylovrin
Well-known
Thanks for all the suggestions guys. My end goal I guess is to expose without a meter, I've read up a lot on sunny16 and looked at EV tables etc.
However, I think everything like that is secondary to having a working meter. And by that I don't mean that one should use a meter instead, I just mean that I will not work around an inaccurate meter just to avoid getting it fixed. It's just not the way it works for me, if the camera has a meter, that meter should be as accurate as is reasonable given the type of camera, age etc.
THEN after that is concluded I can start using it only as a guide etc. I need to have some sort of baseline set for me. I don't want to rate the film at half ISO just because it will solve my problem, UNLESS my meter is actually correct.
It's a conceptual difference to me, one is trying to hide a problem, the other is adjusting for your own way of metering. And I'm fine with doing the latter, but only after the meter is accurate.
That might not make sense to everyone, but at least that is how I work.
I'll change batteries and compare it with some of my other cameras against a gray card. Then I'll see where I go from there. But like I said, in the end it would be nice to not having to rely on a meter, but if I wanted only that option I would have bought an M3 or so instead of the M6.
However, I think everything like that is secondary to having a working meter. And by that I don't mean that one should use a meter instead, I just mean that I will not work around an inaccurate meter just to avoid getting it fixed. It's just not the way it works for me, if the camera has a meter, that meter should be as accurate as is reasonable given the type of camera, age etc.
THEN after that is concluded I can start using it only as a guide etc. I need to have some sort of baseline set for me. I don't want to rate the film at half ISO just because it will solve my problem, UNLESS my meter is actually correct.
It's a conceptual difference to me, one is trying to hide a problem, the other is adjusting for your own way of metering. And I'm fine with doing the latter, but only after the meter is accurate.
That might not make sense to everyone, but at least that is how I work.
I'll change batteries and compare it with some of my other cameras against a gray card. Then I'll see where I go from there. But like I said, in the end it would be nice to not having to rely on a meter, but if I wanted only that option I would have bought an M3 or so instead of the M6.
Dylan Hope
Established
When you shoot with the M6 what do you get your reading off of? This could be what's causing your shots to come out underexposed. If you've got light skin and you meter off your palm, then you're going to have to add a stop (maybe more depending on just how fair your skin is).
denizg7
Well-known
had the same issue found out my mint m6 fired off all shutter speeds atleast twice as fast than set to , even if metered correctly.