Ranchu
Veteran
Maybe it got glossed over, but it doesn't really work with digital since the exposure requirements are so confining.
🙂
🙂
No meter, no big deal
- Thread starter kshapero
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 128
- Views 6K
ptpdprinter
Veteran
It's just baffling.
ptpdprinter
Veteran
What is "it" that doesn't work with digital.
Timmyjoe
Veteran
If you can't see the difference between shooting with a programed digital camera, and the film process I described above, then I'm sorry, your analytical skills are lacking.
Best,
-Tim
ptpdprinter
Veteran
Anybody care to interpret Ranchu's statement. I'm not sure what the "it" refers to and Ranchu's not interested in clarifying.
ptpdprinter
Veteran
Didn't know you were shooting with a programmed digital camera. No manual control? No exposure compensation? Which camera are you shooting? Do you edit your digital work for clients?
Timmyjoe
Veteran
Every digital camera that I've laid hands on has a program mode (i.e. programmed digital camera). Even with manual control, it's still nothing like the process I described above.
Editing is limited to minimal exposure correction and cropping.
Best,
-Tim
Editing is limited to minimal exposure correction and cropping.
Best,
-Tim
maggieo
More Deadly
Leica digital cameras do not have "program mode."
ptpdprinter
Veteran
I primarily shoot film, but I also shoot digital. My digital camera has a program mode (in a roundabout way), but I can't imagine ever using it. No control. For film, I both wet print, and scan and digital print. For digital, I both digital print, and do alternative processes with digital inter-negatives. Film definitely has a craft aspect to it. Digital does too, as do hybrid processes. They're just different. I don't draw a take/make digital/film distinction. The distinction doesn't make any sense to me. Every resulting image, whatever the form, is a "make".
David Hughes
David Hughes
jsrockit
Moderator
Minimal exposure correction? huh?
Ranchu
Veteran
Yeah. We've gotten to the point where you really have nothing more to say about the topic, but you're still put out there's something going on that people enjoy that doesn't involve you. So you want to sell the idea those people still owe you an explanation, like there was something they needed to convince you of. If it works, it allows you to direct the conversion, and deflect from your lack of anything to offer.
It just looks miserable to me.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
In that case, here are some more slides I enjoyed making (without using a meter).
head by Berang Berang, on Flickr
cabriolet by Berang Berang, on Flickr
head by Berang Berang, on Flickrcabriolet by Berang Berang, on Flickr
Timmyjoe
Veteran
Photojournalism. You're shooting in all kinds of lighting conditions, and need to get the picture, regardless. Sometimes you need to tweet the exposure in post, and you're allowed to crop. That's pretty much it, as far as editing is concerned.
Best,
-Tim
Timmyjoe
Veteran
Aperture Priority, "programmed". Anything that allows you to just point & shoot, I consider "programmed". I realize with many Leica digital cameras, the M series, you also need to focus.
Best,
-Tim
jmilkins
Digited User
So, I started in photography in the early 90s using aperture priority mostly. Well, my grandfather's 50s Zeiss Ikon first, but then an ME super and various Nikons before AF Minoltas and on into digital.
Each step towards automation has left me feeling a little more remote from the photographic process, although I might not have realised it at the time. Certainly lazy about exposure, and I think less engaged as a result. Yep - I could have used the manual settings on all of these, but like so many I let the electronic wizardry make me passive.
Lately, I've enjoyed taking the batteries out of my M6 to match my other Ms and spending more time in process of making the picture as Timmy Joe put it.
For me that still often means a handheld meter to double check my assumptions, but I'm throwing caution to the winds more often, trusting to Sunny 16, or opening or closing a stop or two from an initial reading.
That doesn't necessarily mean I am being more creative. But I think I have enjoyed slowing down and thinking about how I want to render the scene more. That pause to consider exposure has often allowed time for a reevaluation of other factors in the image - depth of of field, depth of focus, composition.
And that adds up to satisfaction when I get it right and learning when I get it wrong. For many years the average modern camera has been able to take a better picture than I can technically, and I still value that assistance with transparency films.
But I like making images more slowly, and re-learning some of those things I had to know with my Grandfather's camera. Since it is a hobby that only has to please me, that is fine.
Good light and guesswork to all.
Each step towards automation has left me feeling a little more remote from the photographic process, although I might not have realised it at the time. Certainly lazy about exposure, and I think less engaged as a result. Yep - I could have used the manual settings on all of these, but like so many I let the electronic wizardry make me passive.
Lately, I've enjoyed taking the batteries out of my M6 to match my other Ms and spending more time in process of making the picture as Timmy Joe put it.
For me that still often means a handheld meter to double check my assumptions, but I'm throwing caution to the winds more often, trusting to Sunny 16, or opening or closing a stop or two from an initial reading.
That doesn't necessarily mean I am being more creative. But I think I have enjoyed slowing down and thinking about how I want to render the scene more. That pause to consider exposure has often allowed time for a reevaluation of other factors in the image - depth of of field, depth of focus, composition.
And that adds up to satisfaction when I get it right and learning when I get it wrong. For many years the average modern camera has been able to take a better picture than I can technically, and I still value that assistance with transparency films.
But I like making images more slowly, and re-learning some of those things I had to know with my Grandfather's camera. Since it is a hobby that only has to please me, that is fine.
Good light and guesswork to all.
CMur12
Veteran
A few people here have made reference to slide/transparency/chrome film making a difference when choosing to use or not use a meter.
I think subject matter also makes a difference in the need for accurate metering. Street shooters seem to emphasize content over perfect exposure. For landscape and abstract, I find that content depends on rendition (perfect exposure for the desired effect) and vice versa. Add to that that I shoot slides, and it is just convenient to use a meter and to know how to use it for the desired effect.
My question would be, how many slide shooters use no meter and what are you photographing?
- Murray
I think subject matter also makes a difference in the need for accurate metering. Street shooters seem to emphasize content over perfect exposure. For landscape and abstract, I find that content depends on rendition (perfect exposure for the desired effect) and vice versa. Add to that that I shoot slides, and it is just convenient to use a meter and to know how to use it for the desired effect.
My question would be, how many slide shooters use no meter and what are you photographing?
- Murray
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
Every photo I've posted in this thread so far was made on slide film using meterless cameras (Exa and Edixa Prismaflex).
Here's yet another:
safe for a rainy day by Berang Berang, on FlickrOne more for fun:
Untitled by Berang Berang, on Flickr
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I was doing that until about 50 years ago when I discovered the Olympus-35 SP and discovered that the thing - with its average and spot metering - made life a lot easier most of the time. Plus I could switch to manual when experience told me too. I still work that way today...
I just wish I could justify the cost of slide film; these days I only use about 3 slide films a year, sigh.
Regards, David
I was doing that until about 50 years ago when I discovered the Olympus-35 SP and discovered that the thing - with its average and spot metering - made life a lot easier most of the time. Plus I could switch to manual when experience told me too. I still work that way today...
I just wish I could justify the cost of slide film; these days I only use about 3 slide films a year, sigh.
Regards, David
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I think we agree; I was saying 'mechanical' in the sense of an automatic routine. In that I would be looking at the scene being taken and the meter reading and adjusting as I think necessary.
So starting with the meter reading, rather than (say) thinking "100th at f/8 but perhaps... ".
As an aside, I typed that and wondered why I think '100th' and not '125th' and so I took my old schoolboy camera out of the display cabinet and checked and the speeds run 200, 100, 50 & B. I guess old habits die hard.
Regards, David
Similar threads
