Sunny 16 Rule Question

[David Hughes]

If you want to get downright technical with Sunny-16, just look at the exposure calculator on the back of a Mercury II.


Univex Mercury II Back by P F McFarland, on Flickr...

PF

Hi,

I always thought this version was better but, again, it's only a starting point.

Regards, David

 

[David Hughes]

And, of course...

Regards, David

 

[traveler_101]

I like the "cosmic symbol" - that one is for all eternity, while the Mercury is for those who understand the astrological dimensions of photography.

 

[traveler_101]

I like the "cosmic symbol" - that one is for all eternity, while the Mercury is for those who understand the astrological dimensions of photography.

Hi Matt

Sunny16 is only a starting guidline.
If you are asking the question now, maybe you are not happy with your results ??

If you are happy with your results, carry on as you were.

I also use Sunny 16 often and adjust for different films, exposure situations/wants, and of course light conditions and lens filters.
July noon sun being different than November noon sun and all that.
The Sunny 16 rule is less a rule and more rather a template.
Slide the template around a bit now that you have used it for years and have some experience to back up your choices.

Cheers

I've used SUNNY 16 and yes 400 ISO = 1/500 especially on my IIIf where the next speed is 1/200. That kind of estimation is fine for me, no sweat (assuming b&w film with good latitude).

What turned me against SUNNY 16 is day break and dusk and fog and other strange light where I found my estimating to be wrong. Then I wish for a light meter.

 

[thawkins]

For me the “sixteen” rule works better “as sunny eleven” unless the lighting is especially bright. Then I will use sixteen.

 

[David Hughes]

An aside but interesting; I've a VPK from the posh end of the range and the lens is a focusing Kodak Anastigmat f/7.7 (meaning 1924-26) and it just has the speeds 25; 50; B and T with the apertures marked as f/7.7 and so on to f/32; in other words no guide to exposure.

I've also an early one (1912-14) and it gives masses of exposure information on the shutter plate; 50th is Brilliant & 25th is Clear.

Then "B - Tripod" and

Grey ½ Sec
Dull ¾ Sec
Very D(ull) 1 Sec

Apertures are "Moving Object f-8" to "Marine,Clouds,Snow 32" .

Models in between 1912 and 1926) just have "25 B T 50" showing clear and brilliant and the apertures as 1,2,3,4 with the widest at (I think) f/11 called "Portrait Near View". It must have been fun in those days.

Regards, David

 

[Roger Hicks]

Another vote for "sunny 11". The penalties for overexposure with negative film are very small: slightly reduced sharpness and (with non-chromogenic B+W films) slightly bigger grain. With chromogenic films, B+W or colour, "grain" is slightly smaller with overexposure.

The penalties for underexposure are much more drastic: empty shadows and poor tonality. As usual, it's quite a complex subject which is better covered in an article than in a short post: it goes back to the "First Excellent Print test."

Cheers,

R.

 

[farlymac]

It took me a while to realize what I was doing wrong with Sunny-16. The hardest part was training myself to give the exposures another half or full stop more than what I usually did, especially in the winter. Welcome back, Roger.

PF

 

[Greyscale]

If you want to get downright technical with Sunny-16, just look at the exposure calculator on the back of a Mercury II.


Univex Mercury II Back by P F McFarland, on Flickr



PF

I like the exposure chart on the back of the Rolleiflex, or the calculator on the back of the Signet 35.

 

[narsuitus]

I was living in Chicago when I first began using the Sunny 16 guideline.
Even in the brightest sunlight, it was about 1-stop too dark for my taste.
Sunny 11 worked better for me in Chicago.
It was not until I moved to Texas that I was able get the Sunny 16 to work for me.

 

[Richard G]

I'm pretty sure the bright sun box end of Tri-X exposure guide, no longer supplied, gave 1/250s at f16. It is interesting to see some of Lynnb's wonderful colour beach shots from Sydney in the Gallery here in high summer where he exposed Ektar 100 in a IIIf at 1/200, f8. I asked him about it and he felt this was the ideal exposure for the skin tones. Certainly worked well. It just shows that 1 stop more exposure than sunny 16 will work fine on an Australian beach in summer.

 

[Tom R]

I'm pretty sure the bright sun box end of Tri-X exposure guide, no longer supplied, gave 1/250s at f16. It is interesting to see some of Lynnb's wonderful colour beach shots from Sydney in the Gallery here in high summer where he exposed Ektar 100 in a IIIf at 1/200, f8. I asked him about it and he felt this was the ideal exposure for the skin tones. Certainly worked well. It just shows that 1 stop more exposure than sunny 16 will work fine on an Australian beach in summer.

Interesting. Your first statement begs the question: does the reformulation of TriX (now several generations) impact the "sunny 16" rule? In other words: does the TriX that I used in the 1970's have the same characteristics as what Kodak labels as TriX today?

I'm sure that someone on this forum knows the answer to this

 

[ptpdprinter]

I'm not sure why I'm agonizing over this at this point in my life.

I'm not sure either. If you wanted exact exposure you would use a meter. Sunny 16 is an exposure guide.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Very few people actually understand exposure -- or development. For the former, a great deal depends on how you determine it, and on the subject brightness range. Use a spot meter and its shadow index (and remember that shadow detail is the basis of ISO determination) and you can use the full ISO speed without hesitation. Use a broad-area or incident meter on a bright sunny day for a contrasty subject and it's a good idea to give at least 1 stop more than the meter indicates.

Many Zone System believers, in particular, are saved by the inherent latitude of negative films for over-exposure. Those who use printing-out processes are further helped by the self-masking property of printing-out processes, which automatically tames high negative contrast.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ash13brook]

As I said, not sure why I was agonizing over it. I drive a truck for a living and sometimes I start thinking about something trifling and it takes in a life of it's own.
I like my little laminated chart, so I'll just make a small adjustment and see what happens.
As to agonizing, I remembered as a 6 or 7 year old(1960ish), I was given a brand new Kodak Starflash(no aperture, shutter, focus setting) and a few rolls of Verichrome Pan film. I couldn't tell you what speed it was.
I went around Washington DC clicking away like the happy idiot I was. I don't recall ever having any bad pictures coming back.

Matt

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

The latitude of films and what could/can be squeezed out of them, especially in the days when enlargements were done by hand was/is incredible.

I've a copy of the 1930's or 40's "Selo Text Book of Photography" and it shows (as a double page spread) 6 or 7 photo's with the exposure varying from a 250th at f/11 to 6 seconds at f/8 and you have to guess which one was exposed correctly. Obviously they were the same subject and taken within seconds of each other.

They also point out that the development was identical but the appropriate grade of Selo paper was used. It made the point very well...

Regards, David

 

[Bill Clark]

I find with negative film a little over exposure is better than under. For me, it makes a better print when I’m working in the darkroom.

With transparency film and digital a little under exposure works best for me. Regarding digital I capture everything with RAW format and process with ACR/Bridge and Photoshop.

 

[Dwig]

I was living in Chicago when I first began using the Sunny 16 guideline.
Even in the brightest sunlight, it was about 1-stop too dark for my taste.
Sunny 11 worked better for me in Chicago.
It was not until I moved to Texas that I was able get the Sunny 16 to work for me.

Chalk that up to aerial pollution. When applying the Sunny-16 rule you need to keep in mind that in all modern major metropolitan areas the brightest you ever get is "hazy bright / f/11", and that's only if you are lucky enough to be in some of the less polluted areas. Some places, the best you get is "open shade / f/5.6".

Also, season makes a big difference at high latitudes (>40-45 degrees either north or south). The ancient definition of A.S.A. (as opposed to ASA and ISO) was the inverse of the shutter speed that produced the correct exposure at mid-day on the first day of summer in Washington D.C. Mid-winter and/or at extreme latitudes the light can be 1/2-3 stops lower. Many of the old charts would include a Summer/Winter conversion.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . The ancient definition of A.S.A. (as opposed to ASA and ISO) was the inverse of the shutter speed that produced the correct exposure at mid-day on the first day of summer in Washington D.C. . . .

No. It wasn't. It really, really wasn't. ASA (the same as A.S.A.) was based on research done in Rochester done by Jones and Condit and published in (as far as I recall) 1940. Where did you find this "ancient definition"?

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I find with negative film a little over exposure is better than under. For me, it makes a better print when I’m working in the darkroom. . ..

Dear Bill,

While I completely agree, I'd be interested in your definition of "a little". For me, it's half a stop to a stop more than the meter indicates -- and even that can be inside experimental error with most people's metering techniques. Without a spot meter, 1/3 stop verges on meaningless for negative films: normally, well inside experimental error.

Cheers,

R.