Traveling sans lightmeter: Need critique

[mgilbuena]

I recently purchased a completely manual and lightmeterless M4-P. Coupled with a Nokton 50mm F/1.1 lens, I shot a test roll of Kodak Gold 200 and got the results back last night. I am using the sunny 16 rule.

I have a lot of learning to do.

Firstly, about halfway through the roll, I forgot I was shooting with 200 film and began metering for 100. Oops. I'm not sure if the overexposures are strictly the result of being 1 stop over on film speed alone..

Secondly, I've been incredibly challenged to determine the best way to meter a scene. I've attempted to shoot some difficult lighting (hard shadows) to simply see what the results would be.

R1-11A: This is a photo of my black dog, 6 PM, shot at I believe at f/5.6, 1/1000. Clear blue skies. Side lighting sun from right. How would you have metered this for correct exposure?

R1-2A: This is just before sunset, No shadows. I believe 1/250 at 1.4. This one seems to be a proper exposure.

R1-8A: Noon sun, shot at f/11, 1/250. I was attempting to expose for the Tiki statue in the dark shadows. How would you exposure this picture? (Yes, I know this time of day should be avoided).

Thanks for any guidance.

EDIT: Corrected R1-8A to read f/11, 1/250

 

[filmfan]

Sorry, do you want advice on how to meter for a scene, or how to shoot without a meter?

 

[skwp]

I will give my analysis for one of the shots: Noon sun, shot at f/11, 1/500

For this exposure my thinking is as follows: noon sun at ISO 200 means f16 @ 1/200 (sunny 16). Going to the shade, I would open up 2 stops (f8 @ 1/200 or f11 @ 1/100), so 2 EV lighter than the exposure you guessed. Looking at your image I think this would expose the statue properly while blowing out the highlights on the right side of the pic which are already starting to blow anyway.

Yan

 

[filmfan]

There is a great thread somewhere on this forum which provides a lot of sunny-16 exposure advice (and even a chart). I am sure someone will post the link on here, for it will be quite helpful I believe.

 

[mgilbuena]

skwp: Thanks for the reply. I actually had incorrectly listed it as 1/500. I shot this at 1/250. I thought the reflected light from the grass might lighten up the shadows a bit. I will stick with opening 2 stops for shade.

filmfan: Thanks for the reply. I have a pretty good grasp on the Sunny 16 rule, but have been challenged with metering difficult scenes (hard shadows and side lighting).

 

[ElectroWNED]

Maybe you've seen this, or maybe you haven't: http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm#Light Intensity Chart

Always handy to keep in pocket if you're traveling sans meter.

 

[batterytypehah!]

I think you did very well on the first dog photo (head shot). 5.6 at 1000 is 2/3 of a stop more exposure than sunny-16 calls for, and that's about perfect to get detail in the black main subject. Naturally, the background is overexposed as a result. Can't have both. (Well, you can, but that's called HDR and universally disliked around here.)

The second photo of your dog is also pretty close, but are you sure it was 1.4 at 250?

The Tiki head, I would open up for being in the shadow as has been said, and then some more because it's a dark subject.

 

[Rob-F]

For not using a meter with color film, I think you are doing pretty well! I like the first photo of your dog--the shininess of the coat. The other two have OK exposures, there just wasn't enough shadow detail available for the statue. The exposure is a good mid-point exposure as judged by the leaves. If you had opened up enough for the statue, then the background would have been overexposed, which is what you didn't like in the dog photo. I'd like to see you 1.) re-do the first dog shot against a dark background. 2.) Try the Tiki guy on an overcast day and move in close to get rid of some background.

 

[ZeissFan]

My advice would be to get a meter. Seriously. No sarcasm intended. Just get a meter.

 

[Vince Lupo]

You can overexpose colour neg film up to two stops and still have printable images (the contrast will probably go up though). So the fact that you exposed some frames at ISO 100 instead of ISO 200 is really no big deal. If you have a choice with colour neg film, I'd rather have overexposure than underexposure, so I think you're fine.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I agree with ZeissFan... You can do it with direct sun easily... But for soft light and low light (most photography) you can have a few shots near correct exposure, but lots of them will be a waste no matter negative's latitude.

Cheers,

Juan

 

[MCTuomey]

if the goal were to be able to expose reliably without a meter, would it be faster to work with a meter at first and then wean from it OR faster to go without any meter and just shoot, comparing notes of the exposure against the negative?

a friend of mine, an ex-commercial photog, can estimate exposures within less than a 1/2 stop indoors or outdoors by eye alone. yet he said that he never worked professionally without a meter.

 

[mgilbuena]

I've got 20 rolls of Fomapan 100 standing by for "Leica as a Teacher" personal challenge, found on this site: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html . Thus, I eventually will be transitioning to B&W. I also have some Kodak Ektar I'd like to see.. but I have another roll of Gold 200 to play around with first 🙂

I do have a lightmeter: The Sekonic L-398a. It's been great for posed portraits and metering scenes where I have time to set up; the reason for waning my dependence on the meter is so that I can quickly react to scenes where I may not have enough time to meter to catch the moment. Thus while this process is painful... I hope to learn.

I purposely am exposing on color film, as I understand B&W is a bit more forgiving and I don't want to fall habit to sloppy technique. Thanks for all the wonderful feedback 🙂

 

[enasniearth]

no meter

no meter

many years ago i shot only tri-x in a nikon s2 .
i spent several weeks no camera - just meter walking around day and night metering . first reading and then looking at the scene . then finally guessing the reading then seeing if the meter agreed .
the meter is just a tool only reads what it is pointed at - then you must guage
what that 18% gray is in real life .

if you are useing color negative film it has a long range .
the color slide film is more critical for exposure so you will know you are off .
when they print the color negative film the machine trys to adjust for a perfect print and so not is the best guage of exposure .

try the meter only approach - it is a good start .

 

[semilog]

I purposely am exposing on color film, as I understand B&W is a bit more forgiving and I don't want to fall habit to sloppy technique. Thanks for all the wonderful feedback 🙂

Color slide film is less forgiving than conventional black and white. Color print film is more forgiving. When I got my M6 I started shooting Kodachrome and Provia exclusively to force myself to be honest about whether my exposures were on target.

It's a useful exercise. Even more useful might be to shoot a DSLR on full manual, and monitor histograms. Instant feedback.

 

[Vics]

I agree that you should get a meter, but I also think you should get Fred Picker's book Zone VI Workshop (check out your independent used bookstore.) The meter should read both reflected and incident (the Sekonic L-308 is nice). First pic looks very over exposed and the other two look very under exposed. Shoot black & white and develop it yourself (control.) You can easily learn the four or five stops it takes to get good exposure outdoors, but it gets real tricky when the lights are low. Pick one film and stick with it for a while (some years.)
Enjoy your Leica,
Vic

 

[SolaresLarrave]

many years ago i shot only tri-x in a nikon s2 .
i spent several weeks no camera - just meter walking around day and night metering . first reading and then looking at the scene . then finally guessing the reading then seeing if the meter agreed .
the meter is just a tool only reads what it is pointed at - then you must guage
what that 18% gray is in real life.

I agree most wholeheartedly!! I did the same, and I learned to gauge the light... I also learned that my guesstimations tended to overexpose. So now, if I'm meterless, I take a guess and then close the lens one stop.

But then, carry your meter with for a week or two, meter different scenes, take readings off grass or concrete to get used to their luminosity. Also, try this at different times, not just every day at the same time.

BTW, I meter to expose my subject. That's always my rule. With your dog, I would have taken a reading off the fur and then underexpose one stop... and then shoot again underexposing one and a half.

 

[mgilbuena]

Solares: You mean you take reflective light readings rather than incident lighting?

 

[MCTuomey]

Francisco is suggesting you take a reflected reading off the subject, adjust that reading up or down (which would otherwise drive the subject to an "18% gray card" tone), then bracket your exposures, I believe.

This used to be called "placement" in the zone method, iirc.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

If you insist in learning to guess instead of metering, you're going in the wrong direction... Forget about color negative film and buy some rolls of sensia (slide film) and then you'll really see your guessing... With color negative (a lot more forgiving than black and white) you get similar results when you give the film x light or twice that light or three times... Using color negative film is the worst you can do for your goal...

Cheers,

Juan