metering difficult situations

[SciAggie]

The recent thread with questions about the zone system made me think a more general thread about exposure issues might be relavent. I know that metering is a basic photography skill, but recently I seem to be having some issues that I would like to hear others comment on. I will start with some basic assumptions.

First, I often am shooting film and digital at the same time. I generally assume that with film I need to be aware of shadow detail. For this the concensus seems to be to that taking a reflectance reading of a shadow area and closing down 1 or 2 stops gives a good exposure, then use a developing time that gives consideration to overall contrast. At least the idea here is "expose for shadows".

The consensus around here seems to be that digital emulates slide film and it is preferable to expose for the highlights (so that they aren't blown). I hear many advise that incident metering may be the prefered option for metering.

My problems occur in portrait type situations in natural light. For example, I'm shooting in late evening sun, so I place my subject with the sun behind them and either want to use a reflector or fill flash on their face. I have been trying to take an incident reading to determine exposure. More often than not, I have been getting very underexposed images. I have been having some issues even in open shade. I have to "chimp" to get the exposure right.

Sorry for the long prelude, but here is the question - how do you determine exposure quickly so that you can get on with taking the pictures and spend less time chimping to be sure exposures are correct? With film you CAN'T chimp. What say you?

 

[umcelinho]

I don't shoot using a meter, I estimate. When facing a tricky lighting situation, for instance a mid afternoon scene with strong shadows and harsh lighting on buildings, what I have been doing with some success is taking the exposure for the shadows and for the highlights and picking an intermediate setting, so that I won't blow the highlights and the shadows will retain some detail. If the highlights are f11 and the shadows are f2.8, I'll use f5.6, maybe f4 or f8 depending on where I want to have more detail.


up by Marcelo Colmenero, on Flickr

 

[Roger Hicks]

For a dead easy approach for the backlit portraits, use a true spot meter and a constant skin tone.

Otherwise, remember this: with slides and digi you want the MAXIMUM exposure you can give without blowing highlights to a featureless white. With neg you want the MINIMUM exposure you can give wthout blocking the shadows to a featureless black (though a bit more will rarely matter).

Cheers,

R.

 

[jmcd]

I really only shoot film.

When shooting a roll of film in mixed lighting situations (as opposed to a predictably overcast day, or a single location) I expose and develop for N-1 situation, such that the shots from this roll in a normal contrast range print on a Grade 3 paper, and the shots in a contrasty situation print on a Grade 2 or Grade 1-1/2 (basically what Ansel Adams recommends in The Negative).

Working with the same film a lot, I find that trial, error, and making notes while printing to arrive at a film developing time that allows relatively easy and predictable printing.

I shoot a lot of HP5+, and in a Normal contrast range shoot it at ei 400 with a general reflective meter reading; with a spot reading, I place the shadow area at Zone 4 or 3, usually. For the N-1 situation, I set the general meter at 200, and process for about 85% of the Normal time above (with a spot reading, the meter setting remains unchanged, i.e. the real film speed, or 400 with HP5+, for me).

 

[SciAggie]

Rodger,
So if using a spotmeter I should read any important shadow area or skin tone (whichever is most relavent) with film - and with digital spot meter important skin areas or highlights depending on the subject. Am I understanding you correctly?

These discussions always seem simple and academic when I'm sitting at home, but in actual practice when we sometimes have to make quick decisions it is easy to be unsure what to do.

 

[Doug]

My problems occur in portrait type situations in natural light. For example, I'm shooting in late evening sun, so I place my subject with the sun behind them and either want to use a reflector or fill flash on their face. I have been trying to take an incident reading to determine exposure. More often than not, I have been getting very underexposed images. I have been having some issues even in open shade. I have to "chimp" to get the exposure right.

Sounds like you might be "pointing" the incident meter toward the light... The meter should be reading the light falling on the subject from the camera position. This of course ignores any backlight, and lessens the effects of light coming from the sides. If possible, I'll stand at the subject position and point the incident meter directly at the camera. Or "fake it" as nearly as I can.

 

[SciAggie]

Sounds like you might be "pointing" the incident meter toward the light... The meter should be reading the light falling on the subject from the camera position. This of course ignores any backlight, and lessens the effects of light coming from the sides. If possible, I'll stand at the subject position and point the incident meter directly at the camera. Or "fake it" as nearly as I can.

That's part of why I posted - I know I am using the incident meter correctly as far as taking the reading goes. In a portrait situation, I can stand against the subject and place the meter in the appropriate light and oriented correctly.

Are there issues about the meter being calibrated correctly? I suppose that is a possibility.

 

[LKeithR]

All of my cameras have meters and I make good use of them. I have a couple of handhelds but I find it's too much hassle to pack them around. Camera meters are pretty accurate these days and, after spending a little time getting to know how each one works, it's pretty easy to get consistent results. I shoot mostly manual so if I'm photographing a heavily backlit subject or a scene with a lot of white sky I'll meter off the ground or a solid background area to get a starting point and then shoot and chimp from there--if you're shooting digital the LCD and histogram are your best friends. I rarely have to take more than a couple shots to get it right and for those that are "near misses" I can adjust in post anyway. Unless you've missed by a mile it's easy to push or pull a couple stops either way...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Rodger,
So if using a spotmeter I should read any important shadow area or skin tone (whichever is most relavent) with film - and with digital spot meter important skin areas or highlights depending on the subject. Am I understanding you correctly?

These discussions always seem simple and academic when I'm sitting at home, but in actual practice when we sometimes have to make quick decisions it is easy to be unsure what to do.

Exactly!

But choosing a skin highlight will always give you that skin highlight as a consistent tone (neg or reversal/digi). From http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/sei.html

Instead of reading either a shadow or a highlight, you can instead choose a constant 'keytone'. This is expecially handy in cinematography where you want (for example) the star's skin always to be represented as the same tone. The instruction book once again comes to our rescue, as seen on the right, but we have added the corrections in stops, which suit the ASA/ISO arithmetic system and will be more familiar to most people.

Cheers,

R.

 

[SciAggie]

--if you're shooting digital the LCD and histogram are your best friends. I rarely have to take more than a couple shots to get it right and for those that are "near misses" I can adjust in post anyway. Unless you've missed by a mile it's easy to push or pull a couple stops either way...

That's generally where I am, and that answers in large part what I was trying to determine from this post. I get fairly close with exposures and chimping gets me there quickly as well. I was curious to see if others had the same experience. With film I tend to bracket since I can't chimp. I wanted to see if this was a common experience or if I was just a slow learner - 🙂

 

[SciAggie]

Exactly!

But choosing a skin highlight will always give you that skin highlight as a consistent tone (neg or reversal/digi). From http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/sei.html

Instead of reading either a shadow or a highlight, you can instead choose a constant 'keytone'. This is expecially handy in cinematography where you want (for example) the star's skin always to be represented as the same tone. The instruction book once again comes to our rescue, as seen on the right, but we have added the corrections in stops, which suit the ASA/ISO arithmetic system and will be more familiar to most people.

Cheers,

R.

Thanks again Rodger. I can empathise with my students. Making the step from reading good information like that posted so graciously on your site to the successful understanding and execution of said knowledge is very often a large step indeed. At least for me. I seldom have trouble getting acceptable results; it is the perfectionist in me that is looking to always be better.

 

[jmcd]

A couple of more thoughts.

Are you sure your meter is accurate and linear across the scale?

Also, regarding a general reflective reading, from the Weston light meter manual—the distance of the meter to your subject should be less than the smallest dimension of your subject. This puts a meter quite close to someone's face, for example.