Meterless Sunny 16 and full stops- a dumb question...

[sr1200]

Ok, pardon my dumb question folks, I'm trying to ween myself off a meter here..

Sunny 16...

Say I'm shooting ISO 400 film. Aperture set at f/16 and it's full light out side.

You say shutter 1/400.

I say my film cameras are in full shutter speed stops, so it goes 1/250 then 1/500.

How does this work? I can't select 1/400. If I select 1/250, I'm basically 2/3 stop overexposed. if I select 1/500 I'm basically a 1/4 under exposed. Which is best?

 

[Roger Hicks]

Always err on the side of overexposure with negative films (colour or mono). The penalties for overexposure are small: very slightly bigger grain and very slightly less sharpness. In fact until about 1960 films were rated a stop slower as a "safety margin". Underexpose, and quality falls off a cliff.

Just to make life more interesting, few cameras achieve a true 1/500 at a marked 1/500, so you'd be lucky to get 1/400 anyway. But I'd still shoot at 1/250 if I were you because you are quite likely to prefer the tonality with what you regard as overexposure.

See also http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps basics expoguide.html especially Note 4.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sr1200]

Well, the cameras in question would be (if it matters)

A Nikon FM2 (which I bet DOES get an accurate 1/500)

Leica M3 (doubtful)

Rolleiflex (also doubtful)

 

[sevo]

If you are not doing copy work, you will almost never encounter a situation where each part of the scenery receives the same illumination down to one stop, much less one third. Pretty much every exposure of a three-dimensional subject is subject to a interpretation as to what part should be properly exposed. Where 1/3 stop accuracy won't matter - even professionally consistent interpretation will rarely nail a subject that accurately. People giving samples of their exposure problems in the forums usually are upward of two EV off the mark...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Well, the cameras in question would be (if it matters)

A Nikon FM2 (which I bet DOES get an accurate 1/500)

Leica M3 (doubtful)

Rolleiflex (also doubtful)

Because I have a shutter speed tester, I've tested the speeds of quite a lot of cameras, and I'd be surprised if the FM2 were faster than 1/400. Not that it matters. The advice given above and in the link holds. With the Rollei, of course, the slightly larger grain and the slightly reduced sharpness will matter even less than with the 35mm cameras.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sr1200]

Wait a second, at the site you referenced, on note 4, it says:

"4 The 'Sunny 16' rule

This is a popular rule of thumb for taking pictures in bright sun: at f/16, set a shutter speed that is near enough the reciprocal of the ISO arithmentic speed, so for ISO 100, try 1/125, or for ISO 400, 1/500 (unless your shutter will give you 1/400). Of course you can equally well use 1/250 at f/11 or 1/500 at f/8 instead of 1/125 at f/16."

So, is it 1/250 or 1/500 ?

 

[sr1200]

If you are not doing copy work, you will almost never encounter a situation where each part of the scenery receives the same illumination down to one stop, much less one third. Pretty much every exposure of a three-dimensional subject is subject to a interpretation as to what part should be properly exposed. Where 1/3 stop accuracy won't matter - even professionally consistent interpretation will rarely nail a subject that accurately. People giving samples of their exposure problems in the forums usually are upward of two EV off the mark...

So, you're saying the 1/500 isn't a bad place to be, (I'd of course prefer the faster shutter speed if it's an acceptable exposure)?

That's counter to the other recommendations.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Wait a second, at the site you referenced, on note 4, it says:

"4 The 'Sunny 16' rule

This is a popular rule of thumb for taking pictures in bright sun: at f/16, set a shutter speed that is near enough the reciprocal of the ISO arithmentic speed, so for ISO 100, try 1/125, or for ISO 400, 1/500 (unless your shutter will give you 1/400). Of course you can equally well use 1/250 at f/11 or 1/500 at f/8 instead of 1/125 at f/16."

So, is it 1/250 or 1/500 ?

Read the whole thing. In the same note I also say, Paradoxically, this will often work better with slide films than with negatives; with a negative film, you may lose detail in the dark areas (shadows) of your pictures. This is why the recommendations below are closer to 'sunny 11', though in fact the discrepancy between the film speeds and the normally available shutter speeds is such that it's close to a 'sunny eleven-and-a-third' rule.

Do not look for more precision than exists in the system. Normally, 1/3 or 1/2 stop under will not matter much: the film has that much safety margin built in. Sooner or later, though, you run into underexposure, the penalties for which are far greater than the penalties for overexposure. This is why I suggest you always err on the side of overexposure.

Remember too that "sunny" is not a precise scientific term: sun in Bermuda is not the same as sun in Scotland (and I've lived in both places). ISO development recommendations are reputedly based on typical outdoor weather in Rochester NY: Japanese members of the ISO film committee repeatedly argued in favour of a lower gamma (contrast) to suit more southerly climes better.

If you really want to understand exposure, you might care to try to find a copy of Perfect Exposure (David & Charles, 1999); but if you're using Sunny 16 you'd do better to accept that it's just a rough old approximation anyway. Again I say: do not look for more precision than exists in the system.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sr1200]

Good answers. Thank you.

 

[ruby.monkey]

Get a TwinMate and save yourself the headache.

 

[sevo]

So, you're saying the 1/500 isn't a bad place to be, (I'd of course prefer the faster shutter speed if it's an acceptable exposure)?

That's counter to the other recommendations.

No, I say that accurate exposure is not as simple as it seems. "Sunny 16" is a perfectly valid figure when doing vertical copy work outdoors in a treeless plain in moderate conditions, with a small camera, slim camera stand and long cable release.

For pretty much anything else, you'll have to apply a scenery bias. As anything obscuring the sun will reduce exposure, that will (except for photography in snow, on the shore or on similarly reflective ground) usually be in favour a longer exposure, and with negative film, overexposure is on the safe side, so you'll usually be better off with 1/250 all around, if you insist on a formula that relieves you of thinking.

But given exposure latency of modern film and sensors, and the inability of the human eye to perceive absolute values, it is debatable whether you should even bother als long as that bias results in corrections below 1 stop - few people manage to use their light meters to higher accuracy.

 

[Hatchetman]

For negative film either would work. Slide film I'd rather be under than over.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sunny 16 is the shutter speed should be CLOSEST to the film speed in bright sunlight.

Why? I know of no sensitometric or logical reason for this assertion.

A far better piece of advice, with negative film, is that it should be the next lower shutter speed, i.e. 1/250 for ISO 400, 1/125 for ISO 200, etc. This automatically biases you towards slight overexposure, for which the penalties are tiny when you're talking about 1/3 or even 2/3 stop.

Also, where is your "bright sunshine"? Rochester NY or Tokyo, Bermuda or Aberdeen? As I said in an earlier post, it's not a precise scientific definition. Underexpose and you are inviting poor quality. Sure, 1/3 stop will never matter -- unless your "bright sunshine" isn't as bright as you think, or unless you want a bit more shadow detail.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Swift1]

I do most of my shooting without a meter (C-41, E6, B&W)and judge exposure using Sunny 16 as a guide.
I have found that for most outdoor shooting (in my area) Sunny 11 tends to work better. For ISO 400 film, I use 1/500 and f/11. With ISO 100, I use f/11 and 1/125.
Depending on the film I'm using, I might choose f/16 instead of f/11 if I want more contrast and saturation.

 

[wjlapier]

Roger's advice in interesting. I'll have to give it a try, but in the mean time, I use sunny 16 even with my M6 even though it has a meter. On a sunny day I shoot 1/ISO f/16. Film 200ISO, SS is 1/250/ 400ISO SS 1/500. Never noticed underexposed negatives.

 

[johnnyrod]

http://rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps expo neg.html

Roger again - look a page or two from the bottom for more on the Sunny f16 rule. The f16 refers to the un being "over your shoulder" i.e. bright with distinct shadows but few darkly shaded areas in your subject. Add a stop or two depending on how far around the sun is from being behind you. That's up to 2 stops for the same scene.

Re. shutter speeds, Roger is dead on, measured speeds are called accurate if they are within about 20% for the faster ones, 25% for the slower ones, and they are rarely faster than they say. Many older cameras are often half to a full stop slower than you think even at, say, 1/250. The extra exposure isn't bad though, unless you're already on the edge of blowing out nearly every detail there, in which case you have a different problem.

 

[Dwig]

http://rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps expo neg.html

Roger again - look a page or two from the bottom for more on the Sunny f16 rule. The f16 refers to the un being "over your shoulder" i.e. bright with distinct shadows but few darkly shaded areas in your subject. Add a stop or two depending on how far around the sun is from being behind you. That's up to 2 stops for the same scene. ...

And, sad to say, you need to increase the exposure depending on the level of air polution. In major cities, even on days that seem clear you may find you need to increase the exposure by 1/2-1 stop.

 

[ChrisLivsey]

Goodness me I cannot begin to imagine how I've been getting it, mostly, right ( to my eye for my purposes) all this time. You can overthink things you know. The essence of sunny sixteen is being somewhat relaxed about exposure, tweaking 1/3rd of a stop every few steps is not the way to go.
What can't be beat is shooting film, lots of it, under varying light and learning, you never stop learning, get a feeling for the light, don't analyse it feel it.
In another thread I linked to an obituary of the master portrait photographer Jane Brown: She worked almost exclusively with natural light and ignored the camera’s in-built light meter, preferring instead to hold a clenched fist away from her body to see how the light fell on the back of her hand.
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/dec/21/jane-bown

BTW lots here on shutter accuracy, have you ever checked f stop accuracy between lenses? Thought so, what about repeatability of that mechanical device to a level of precision? No, again! I can let you into a secret then, it's more than the difference between 1/400th and 1/500th.
For the OP: You're never going to wean off a meter fretting about a quarter of a stop, and boy is that a great meter you have.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Goodness me I cannot begin to imagine how I've been getting it, mostly, right ( to my eye for my purposes) all this time. .. .

Dear Chris,

Possibly a mixture of film latitude and experience?

That's how I get away with it.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

And, sad to say, you need to increase the exposure depending on the level of air polution. In major cities, even on days that seem clear you may find you need to increase the exposure by 1/2-1 stop.

Quite. Delhi? Beijing? Even LA.

Cheers,

R.