Today is Sunny 16 Day

How were we expected to use this?

Kodk%20V-127%20Exposure%20Guide-L.jpg


I guess we should memorise it...

Luckily I still have my trust Leicameter:-

Leicameter-L.jpg


Regards, David
 
We have a sunny day today! Was it Lynn’s Thread that stopped the rain or are there other forces behind it?
 
It's a typo for "funny" as in "funny-perculiar" as in the famous joke of 1914 or 1918 about the schoolboy in trouble - I can't be bothered to look it up.


Regards, David
 
In honor of S16 Day and Lynn's thread, I shot my M6 at yesterday's dinner party using Sunny 16. I normally use a handheld or the camera's meter.

It's probably more to do with HP5's latitude than my skill, but the exposures are excellent, even as the evening light faded.

Thanks Lynn. I might have been happier with the M246's high and auto ISO capability, but it was fun.

John

51291399522_ddd1e0fbe0_b.jpg


51292324168_389db602f9_b.jpg
 
lynnb said:
…
Pull out your old Kodak film boxes and refresh your memory of the Sunny 16 Guide!

Sunny16Kodak-1024x573.jpg


…
Click to expand...

Thank you for that. That chart is what I used when I first began “serious” photography as an 11 year old kid with my 8mm ciné camera - the first camera I had with aperture control. I’m sure I’ve got a few of those charts in old empty Kodachrome II boxes (ASA 25 with a shutter speed of 1/30 at 16 frames per second).
 
John that first group photo has such a lovely variation of tones. It will be your exposure the light, the film, the location, the lens and those fine young people. And then there’s the shot itself. Lovely picture.
 
Richard G said:
John that first group photo has such a lovely variation of tones. It will be your exposure the light, the film, the location, the lens and those fine young people. And then there’s the shot itself. Lovely picture.
Click to expand...

I agree Richard. Lovely photos John. Thanks for sharing them in this thread. I have some HP5+ exposed using Sunny 16 on the 4th which I'll get around to developing later today.
 
Anyone notice that the Verichrome pan exposure instructions say heavy overcast needs two stops more than full sun, and the Kodacolor one says four stops more? The latter makes more sense to me.
 
Thank you, Lynn and Rob.

I got to wondering about shooting digital with Sunny 16, which I've never done because of concern with highlight latitude. I found this Petapixel post, which aligns with my experience.

I suppose you'd be fine in settings like Lynn's beaches, but not so much in urban areas of constantly varying light. At least not for me.

John
 
A question

A question

Nice collection of guides David. My question is about the beach/sea exposure. I am standing on a grassy area near a beach - it’s a sunny f/16 kind of day so I use f/16 at 1/500 sec for my TriX photos, which I check with my incident light meter. I then walk down to the beach, the sun and light hasn’t changed, but the guides say to cut my exposure by a stop to f/22. Why? The light hasn’t changed according to my incident meter. Won’t my shadows now be underexposed by a stop? Don’t you want the beach to be a bright white in the photos? Please explain this to me.
 
Hmmm, reading taken involving grass are usually accurate and beaches have extra light reflected from the sand and sea, perhaps...

Any one interested in the early sunny 16 rule will find a little here:-

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=164700&highlight=reciprocal

As I mentioned, sunny 16 is useful to work back from 1920's and 30's table to get the film speeds. Some were about 5 iSO or ASA as it was then.

The safety cover mentioned in the Dufaycolor leaflet was a sort of small round metallic sticker to go over the red window at the back of the camera.
Regards, David
 
KenR said:
Nice collection of guides David. My question is about the beach/sea exposure. I am standing on a grassy area near a beach - it’s a sunny f/16 kind of day so I use f/16 at 1/500 sec for my TriX photos, which I check with my incident light meter. I then walk down to the beach, the sun and light hasn’t changed, but the guides say to cut my exposure by a stop to f/22. Why? The light hasn’t changed according to my incident meter. Won’t my shadows now be underexposed by a stop? Don’t you want the beach to be a bright white in the photos? Please explain this to me.
Click to expand...

Well, I think you’re correct. The only reason I think the advice to stop down is given is because the sand is so bright and if it’s a major part of your image you’ll have everything blown out - no detail. Certainly for transparencies or digital that’s a problem. With negatve film you can recover the detail if you want to.

But if the sandy area isn’t the major part of the image, I’d keep the exposure the same.
 
Pál_K said:
Well, I think you’re correct. The only reason I think the advice to stop down is given is because the sand is so bright and if it’s a major part of your image you’ll have everything blown out - no detail. Certainly for transparencies or digital that’s a problem. With negatve film you can recover the detail if you want to.

But if the sandy area isn’t the major part of the image, I’d keep the exposure the same.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. When I photograph people on white sand I expose for skin tones, f/11 or even f/8 if faces are in shadow. I want to overexpose sand by 1 stop to render it correctly. Exposure meters are calibrated for 18pct gray. I'd only use f/16 or f/22 if I wanted to record highlights at the expense of the shadows.

Digital requires a different technique, exposing for the highlights.
 
This might help in the debate:-

AP%20Exp%20Tables%209-1937%20%28Small%29.jpg


In the 1940's and 50's a set of tables was available from the BSI* and most of the exposure calculators were based on it. They have one advantage; you have to set 5 or 6 parameters and after a while you know what the result will be and can leave the calculator behind and use your brain and memory for the exposure. It was good enough for slides as I recall.

Regards, David

*British Standards Institution
 
David Hughes said:
This might help in the debate:-

In the 1940's and 50's a set of tables was available from the BSI* and most of the exposure calculators were based on it. They have one advantage; you have to set 5 or 6 parameters and after a while you know what the result will be and can leave the calculator behind and use your brain and memory for the exposure. It was good enough for slides as I recall.

Regards, David

*British Standards Institution
Click to expand...

Thanks David, very interesting. My word that LUMIERE Filmcolor was a slow film!
 
lynnb said:
Thanks David, very interesting. My word that LUMIERE Filmcolor was a slow film!
Click to expand...


All part of the service; it's a pleasant change to have something serious to discus.

As for the shocks you get looking at old stuff, you'd be amazed how much hasn't chanced and how in one or two ways we are worse off. I've a display cabinet half full of old meters from the 30's (AVO, FED etc) and so on from the 1890's and would be quite happy to use some of them all the tie simply because they are so well designed.

For example the 1930 Leica one gives direct speed readings for a sensible f/6.3 aperture with a conversion dial beside it. Leaving the camera at f/6.3 was probably the best way to use it... It seems to be the start of aperture priority! And there's the Wellcome Photographers Diary of 1915 which I'd love to have for nowadays.


Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom