Night/low light exposure without a light meter

C

chikne

Well-known
Local time
3:10 AM
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
424
View My Gallery
Hi,

does anyone know of something that works for those situations?

I mean I shot a roll not long ago ISO 1600, wide open at f4 using 1/15 and some frames came out blank.

Any tips?


Thanks
 
How about this (modify for your aperture and film speed):

476908753_szZwH-XL.jpg


Generally, hand-held, I go as low as possible.
 
Meters become increasingly inaccurate at really low light conditions.

If 1600+f/4+1/15th doesn't register on the film, then the camera is not pointing at anything decidedly luminous, so your options include:

a) adding additional light, or:
b) bracket aggressively toward overexposure via shutter speed (2 stops per bracket), and possibly:
c) push process your film

Your shutter probably goes all the way to 1 second, and you probably have a 'bulb' setting. Tripod.

Bracketing your shots (1/15, 1/4, 1 for instance) will cover your ass and will help you be able to better judge what you need.
 
Can you tell us a bit more about the scene -- evenly lit/not? includes light sources/not?, etc.
If you're shooting on the street at night, for example, there should be large variations in light so it's unusual to have just blank.
 
Completely blank? Next time you might follow Roland's excellent table. I had long ago made up a ready reference for use with ASA 125 film, but heaven knows if it still exists.
 
In a town, or in many places, a rolled up hat or a beanbag in the corner of a wall or fence, on a rock etc can be a handy tripod substiute for a couple of seconds. This is also useful if you weren't planning on that sunset photo etc. but just couldn't resist it. 🙂
 
Last night I took a few night shots: 400 ISO, and f/5.6 to f/8, these took between two minute and 15 seconds to expose right..

Now go figure where your 1/15 second exposures went wrong. Incidentally, these were shots under street lights, but dark and far away ...

Do you by chance go digitally? Histograms are your best friends, otherwise, measure right under the street light off your palm and add stops profusely ... as you move away. The difference between 15 second and 2 minutes exposure is only 3 stops! And it gets dark rather quickly way from light (the inverse square rule means: double the distance = 4 times less light (= 2 stops) ... )
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the table Ferider.

You know I don't even mind blurred photographs, is just those blank frames you know....

Thanks all!
 
Ferider's table appears to be quite reasonable and fits my experience.
I used to shoot indoors events (no flash of course) and 1/30 to 1/15 is quite common (at f/2) for average/under average lit indoors. Sometimes though an intimately-lit interiors (often clubs or average wedding events when not in peak moments) demand the same settings but at 1600 ISO...

At a times, where reading from my digisix doesn't seem to be consistant (due to really low light) or are very low but I really want to try my vision, I just put the camera to the slowest possible speed I care to handle at (usually either 1/30 or 1/15 if carrying 35mm lens) and shoot away. Then hoping the film will pull out ...
 
Silver halide emulsions seem to run into a brick wall at ISO 3200. Fuji has claimed a dubious 1600 but none of Kodak's various "recording films", going back to Royal-X Pan Recording in the early 1960's, have really crossed the 1600 threshhold (barrier?) regardless of developer. You can get over a thousand only if you stretch the definition of "ISO speed" and compensate with a bit of increased contrast.
 
For street lights & traffic at night I use 10 sec. f 11 @ iso 100.
(reciprocity failure corrected)

if you don't want a long line of a car's head lamp you can change
time & f stop for example 5 sec f 8 ...


sample
 
Last edited:
Well I've just come back from centre town to see how this would go. I shall have mentioned that this is mostly for street stuff rather than landscape etc...

Turns out anything is useless. too slow and end just making random guesses. Not good even a handheld meter would be too slow.

Will have to consider an AE camera.

TA
 
An enormous range of exposures -- as much as 3 stops -- is often acceptable in night shots, with differences contributing more to mood than to any imaginary standard of technical quality: see http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps lowlight.html

True ISO 1600 with film is extremely rare: normally 1600 is an EI, Exposure Index, with some loss of shadow detail or increase in contrast or both. Even so, EI 1600 with any reasonable film or sensor should yield some image, so it must have been very poor light indeed.

Then again, 1/15 @ f/4 isn't really very impressive. See http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps king.html for pics at f/1 (16 times the light-gathering power) and ISO 2500 (digital), at longer than 1/15 second.

Cheers,

R.
 
You (or one, just for the sake of the thread) will learn more by using the meter as a tool to learn how to read more accurately, and indeed more instinctively. Try to set the shutter speed and aperture before the reading, you will soon start to get close.

Then, you can forget about taking the meter reading, or keep using it though you will feel more confident from engaging in such a practise.

Just my two pence.
 
chikne said:
Turns out anything is useless. too slow and end just making random guesses. Not good even a handheld meter would be too slow.

Will have to consider an AE camera.

TA
Click to expand...

You may find you will be similarly disappointed. AE is just another meter that may or may not give you the exposure you desire. A night scene is generally bright highlights surrounded by dim reflections and a TTL meter will read differently as you pan or tilt even slightly. And it will depend if its center-weighted, spot, or matrix. But at the end of the day, it doesn't know where you want the highlights, shadow, and midrange.

Your comment about random guessing really depressed me. Rather than 'random', I urge you once again to bracket your exposures and analyze the results. This is the systematic approach that builds experience and proficiency -- and makes you a photographer, rather than a button pusher. Bracketing won't be 'useless'.

Mr. Hicks made a good point about the variance of acceptable nighttime photographs. If you bracket your shots, you may surprise yourself at the variety of looks you are able to achieve, and that would be a good thing, too.
 
Echoing what Roger says above: Some time ago during the winter I did several exposures at a graveyard. I think the exposures were something like at 5.6 36/50/95 seconds (compensating for reciprocity with Tri-X). The difference should be 1 stop between each. I was surprised to find that all three gave me very printable results, with not much to tell between them all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom