Losing the Light Meter

[burancap]

2. Assuming 400 film, sunny 16 to me is really:

beach / swimming pool on a sunny day = 1/500 + f16
sunny bright = 1/500 + f11
cloudy bright = 1/500 + f8
cloudy cloudy = 1/500 + f5.6 or f4 (depends)

I think this is pretty solid advice.

I shoot 400. I shoot 1/500. My variable is aperture, and my experience is as above.

Having consistently seen these readings on meters and today my PLM app on my iPhone, I tend to take three readings when I first pull my camera out to confirm. Invariably the readings always fall in those guidelines and metering is then done in my head. Of the last three rolls I shot this way, I had maybe three questionable overexposures.

 

[bgetty]

hi,

i recently found shooting with my iiic without the small VC meter II very liberating.
a couple of suggestions:

1. Shoot iso 400 film to start, and use the 400 as the base, later when you are comfortable with
guessing the exposure, try faster or slower film.

2. Assuming 400 film, sunny 16 to me is really:

beach / swimming pool on a sunny day = 1/500 + f16
sunny bright = 1/500 + f11
cloudy bright = 1/500 + f8
cloudy cloudy = 1/500 + f5.6 or f4 (depends)
7am in Singapore = 1/500 + f2.8

3. indoors is a different ballgame altogether, i find that my office
with bright fluorescent light and window light, the exposure
is typically 1/30 and f4. At home in the evenings, 1/30 and f2.8 or f2.

I get stuck at dark places at night, usually 1/15 and f1.4 ....

4. a good rule of thumb i learnt is shady place is outside +3 stops,
eg. taking street photography where there are shadows from the
buildings, i guess shadowless areas, say f11 and 1/500 and I open 3 stops
to f4 and 1/500.

raytoei

this is my exact method. great guidelines!

 

[presspass]

There was a very nice exposure chart posted here some time ago. It can be reduced to 3x5 file card size and is still readable. It works well. Sorry, I can't cite the location.

 

[presspass]

Found it. There's a nice pocket-size chart in the Techniques, sticky post for just this purpose.

 

[nikon_sam]

Do you also guess at your focusing or do you take the time to look through the viewfinder and carefully focus and frame your subject...???
Why not use the tools you have to your better advantage...if having pictures that are constantly gray, washed out or too dark don't bother you then why not out of focus...
You've read people taking about film latitude...why would you want to make things harder later like in printing these "guessed at" negs.
Maybe it's just me but I would rather learn to use and trust a light meter than guess, even though it's an educated guess...I prefer not worrying whether I got that once in a lifetime shot or a photograph that I now have to call "Art"...

 

[Godfrey]

Google the Kodak Pocket Photo Guide and buy one from Ebay. It has little calculator dials for various exposure situations in it. Read it, use it, remember what it tells you. After a while, you begin to recognize common situations and just make the settings yourself.

I carry a light meter and have an app in my iPhone that makes it into one. I tend to use them relatively infrequently when I'm out shooting - I'll take a baseline reading to get a feel for the light I have to work with, then just shift the settings up and down from there based on what the guide taught me.

Two of these wonderful books are in my permanent collection of photo lore. I was given the first one in 1968 by my uncle. The second I bought in 1991 when I'd misplaced the first (later found it).

One is ALWAYS in my bag when I go traveling, with any camera.

G

 

[tunalegs]

Maybe it's just me but I would rather learn to use and trust a light meter than guess, even though it's an educated guess...I prefer not worrying whether I got that once in a lifetime shot or a photograph that I now have to call "Art"...

You can't properly expose a shot like this by a lucky guess.

Untitled by berangberang, on Flickr

The more you shoot, the better you become at making judgements. A shot like the one above could confuse a meter as well, so you'd end up having to make your own judgement on how to expose anyway. Patchy light, evening, back lit - you'd still have to consider all of those things when using a meter. Not that one wouldn't be handy, but a meter isn't fool proof either.

 

[sepiareverb]

I learned a long time ago that a well exposed negative saves a huge amount of time in the darkroom and so I use a meter. I generally take a guess as I bring the camera up to my eye if there is time, and am usually within a half a stop. But a half a stop can make the difference between a print that looks absolutely magnificent and one that looks good. If I'm going to all the trouble of making the dang frame I might as well do it right. And even with a meter I'll bracket some things.

 

[DamenS]

Do you also guess at your focusing or do you take the time to look through the viewfinder and carefully focus and frame your subject...???
Why not use the tools you have to your better advantage...if having pictures that are constantly gray, washed out or too dark don't bother you then why not out of focus...
You've read people taking about film latitude...why would you want to make things harder later like in printing these "guessed at" negs.
Maybe it's just me but I would rather learn to use and trust a light meter than guess, even though it's an educated guess...I prefer not worrying whether I got that once in a lifetime shot or a photograph that I now have to call "Art"...

Nikon Sam - meet Zone Focussing ... Zone Focussing - meet Nikon Sam. Nikon Sam - meet shooting from the hip ... shooting from the hip - meet Nikon Sam. Why do either of you exist ? Nikon Sam says you shouldn't. He says, "why would you want to?" or "why not use the tools you have to your best advantage?" (the easy answer to which would be either; these are tools we don't currently have, or using them is not always to our best advantage). Just like "guessing at metering", you lead to mediocrity by necessity. You should not exist. There is no use for you. Nikon Sam has pronounced it so (and also gotten rid of the constantly grey, washed out or too dark negatives with which one is inevitably left if one doesn't use a light meter).

PS. He also states that if you guess at metering - which leads to these "gray, washed out or too dark" photos, you may as well be taking out of focus photos ("if having pictures that are constantly gray, washed out or too dark don't bother you then why not out of focus..."). Why not, indeed !

 

[taemo]

i would say just keep practicing and keep shooting.
film is very forgiving, once you have the general concept of sunny 16 you can shoot without checking the metering all the time.

for example on my M6 and ISO 400 film I can go:
f16, 1/500 - bright sunny days
f11, 1/250 - overcast
f8, 1/250 along the streets

 

[oftheherd]

Nikon Sam - meet Zone Focussing ... Zone Focussing - meet Nikon Sam. Nikon Sam - meet shooting from the hip ... shooting from the hip - meet Nikon Sam. Why do either of you exist ? Nikon Sam says you shouldn't. He says, "why would you want to?" or "why not use the tools you have to your best advantage?" (the easy answer to which would be either; these are tools we don't currently have, or using them is not always to our best advantage). Just like "guessing at metering", you lead to mediocrity by necessity. You should not exist. There is no use for you. Nikon Sam has pronounced it so (and also gotten rid of the constantly grey, washed out or too dark negatives with which one is inevitably left if one doesn't use a light meter).

PS. He also states that if you guess at metering - which leads to these "gray, washed out or too dark" photos, you may as well be taking out of focus photos ("if having pictures that are constantly gray, washed out or too dark don't bother you then why not out of focus..."). Why not, indeed !

Everybody gets to do it the way they like, as long as the results they get are results they like.

So, if you like improperly exposed and out of focus photos, I think you are on the right track.

 

[DamenS]

Everybody gets to do it the way they like, as long as the results they get are results they like.

So, if you like improperly exposed and out of focus photos, I think you are on the right track.

Exactly, oftheherd - if you think getting no photo is better than getting a photo which MAY not be entirely accurately exposed and entirely accurately focussed, then you should be allowed to get no photo. Each individual must decide, and each individual has the right to do so - this is the right track, indeed. 🙂



PS. Working without a meter doesn't necessarily mean the negatives will be improperly exposed ... as a wise man once said in another recent thread:

Lots of good suggestions and it never hurts to train oneself to be as close to correct as possible without a light meter. For many years I used the data sheet that came with films and my experience to take photos. I recommend it for those films that still do so.

I'll assume that recommendation is not based upon you finding your own negatives to be "improperly exposed" (even if they were "out of focus") ... although, I guess, stranger things have happened !!

 

[thegman]

Do you also guess at your focusing or do you take the time to look through the viewfinder and carefully focus and frame your subject...???
Why not use the tools you have to your better advantage...if having pictures that are constantly gray, washed out or too dark don't bother you then why not out of focus...
You've read people taking about film latitude...why would you want to make things harder later like in printing these "guessed at" negs.
Maybe it's just me but I would rather learn to use and trust a light meter than guess, even though it's an educated guess...I prefer not worrying whether I got that once in a lifetime shot or a photograph that I now have to call "Art"...

With my Horseman Convertible, or the Fotoman 69 I used to have, then yes, I do/did guess my focusing. I also do that with my Rollei 35.

I get what you're saying, but sometimes I'll use a meter (like for slide film or picky negative film like Ektar), sometimes I won't. Sometimes I'll guess focus on the Rollei 35, or try to get it exact with a Rolleiflex.

I find shooting without a meter very pleasant and liberating, but also I enjoy using a meter to try to get exposure just the way I want it. There is a time and a place for everything.

 

[nikon_sam]

Nikon Sam - meet Zone Focussing ... Zone Focussing - meet Nikon Sam. Nikon Sam - meet shooting from the hip ... shooting from the hip - meet Nikon Sam. Why do either of you exist ? Nikon Sam says you shouldn't. He says, "why would you want to?" or "why not use the tools you have to your best advantage?" (the easy answer to which would be either; these are tools we don't currently have, or using them is not always to our best advantage). Just like "guessing at metering", you lead to mediocrity by necessity. You should not exist. There is no use for you. Nikon Sam has pronounced it so (and also gotten rid of the constantly grey, washed out or too dark negatives with which one is inevitably left if one doesn't use a light meter).

PS. He also states that if you guess at metering - which leads to these "gray, washed out or too dark" photos, you may as well be taking out of focus photos ("if having pictures that are constantly gray, washed out or too dark don't bother you then why not out of focus..."). Why not, indeed !

WOW...nikon sam said all that...??? 😀😀😀😉

 

[oftheherd]

Exactly, oftheherd - if you think getting no photo is better than getting a photo which MAY not be entirely accurately exposed and entirely accurately focussed, then you should be allowed to get no photo. Each individual must decide, and each individual has the right to do so - this is the right track, indeed. 🙂



PS. Working without a meter doesn't necessarily mean the negatives will be improperly exposed ... as a wise man once said in another recent thread:



I'll assume that recommendation is not based upon you finding your own negatives to be "improperly exposed" (even if they were "out of focus") ... although, I guess, stranger things have happened !!

I see no conflict with what I said (wise, or whatever). That was a time when I had no camera with a built in light meter, and didn't have a light meter of my own. Flash I exposed by guide number. Non-flash, including many crime scene photos in Vietnam, I surely did use the film data sheet if I had it with me. If not, then I had to expose by guess and by gosh, using my experience.

Usually I would bracket more than one shot (you normally only get one chance for crime scene shots). When I got my first SLR (Yashica TL Super) and started using the built in meter, I tested it under different conditions and was pleasantly surprised. Later, I added a hand held meter for non-metered cameras and was pleasantly surprised again.

So as I have said, one works with what one has/likes that produces the results one likes. I want some ability to work without a meter if I am forced to, but prefer to use a tested/trusted meter. But that's just me. YMMV.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I found it is very easy if I use ISO100 b/w film and Sunny 16.
Using it with FED-2 and my folders. Very easy during day hours for street and reportage.
I just need to change aperture between shadow and open areas.

More difficult indoors, but b/w film is very forgiving.

If I'm in doubt, I use exposure meter in iPhone.
It has calibration and "liveview''. Seems to be easier compare to dedicated exposure meter.

 

[Brian Legge]

I've been on the 'guess and then measure with incident meter' path for a while. During the day, deriving from sunny 16 isn't bad for lit areas. There are points where I struggle and an often at least a stop off.

Sometimes shadows are -2, sometimes the are -5. Light can change quickly in the evenings and can be difficult to judge. Once my eyes adjust to an indoor environment, I have a hard time judging it as well (particularly as light sources can vary significantly in intensity and there is a rapid falloff from them making distance important).

I find carrying a small incident meter and only remeasuring when I feel the need works best for me unless I'm in conditions where the light changes are dramatic and rapid. In those situations, I still find an in camera meter the fastest way to shoot though I prefer the results I get with an incident meter.

 

[john_pears]

i to like the allure of shooting without a meter, i think the idea of sticking with one film speed is a pretty good, but i have been to enamoured with pushing and pulling the two films that i shoot (ilford surveillance p3 / p4 and polyp an f) to be consistently using the same iso. in an effort to move closer to the idolised purity of meterless shooting i have been taking one or two readings and then attempting to adjust, in the u.k. the weather is rarely constant for more than 10 mins so im going to claim this makes it harder to shoot meterless. ultimately im very happy with my sometimes unpopular mr meter on top of my m2 gleefully scratching my top plate a little bit everyday, as despite this possible design faux pay by the cameras gods at leitz i like the way it couples to my shutter speed as id rather leave my aperture at f8 for 'candid/street' photos. plus it means i never forget my meter so its their for 'tricky situations'. alternatively i could find an exposure guide that adjust shutter speed rather than aperture but I'm happy the way things are for now, improvement is in the distant future somewhere over the horizon.

 

[sepiareverb]

... but b/w film is very forgiving.

That entirely depends on your expectations for the finished product.

 

[Calzone]

Nothing like a perfect exposure and nailing it consistently. I've gotten good at it, but I use and rely on a meter.

My friend Andre can shoot color slides without a meter, and get perfect exposures. I'm very jealous. I figure its all a matter of experience, practice and discipline.

Cal