ptpdprinter
Veteran
It is not immediately clear to me how you would determine exposure from that chart. Can you go about explaining how you would put it to use.I am with you.
I know the reflectivity of the dirt around here and more-or-less the varying brightness of the sky diurnal and annual.
This is useful to try and memorize:
That exposure chart would be easier to use if it was in watts per steradian. I used to have a Fortran program that went from density measured on film to watts per steradian. I suppose it would work in reverse. Most people don't use film anymore for such measurements. As one of the Scientists at work used to say, "Film- so useful that if it did not exist we'd have to invent it." The 1970s.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
My "walking about exposure bible" for at least forty years has been the "Kodak Pocket Photo Guide" which takes tables like the above and turns them into very useful, paper-mechanical calculators from which you can get to know exposure settings vs scene situations very well. I almost always have one in my camera bag when I'm out with the M4-2, the Retina IIc, or any other of my film cameras. Super handy, and usually findable on EBay for just a couple of dollars...
G
G
Mos6502
Well-known
I don't like clutter in the viewfinder.
And if it be a vintage camera, the only thing worse than clutter in the viewfinder, is non-working clutter in the viewfinder. I prefer to see the image, and only the image when composing.
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
An interesting topic, KShapero. I used to be more attached to the metered cameras (particularly SLR). I can see their value for some subjects like sports photography w long lenses. But what cured me of the in-camera meter was years of LF camera use. I now far prefer the clean framelines of the M2 or M4 (still wish i could get rid of the pesky 135 lines!)....same with my Rolleiflex. I often use a general incident reading or sometimes a spot reading and then lift the camera to my eye, already having the idea of the framing in my mind. No more peering through the camera for an image. I find needles & diodes in the finder to be distracting. I think the original M3/M2 idea was brilliant. The M6/MP drove me nuts.....particularly with the 75mm lines inside the 50mm. I sold my MP & went forwards...returning to the clean frames of the M4.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
I bought another SBOOI in Paris last summer.
raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
SBOOI's are the "bee's 🐝 knees" 
I shot a family gathering one time with my IIIf and Summitar set to f8. I may have metered once to get an idea of exposure but I shot the rest of the afternoon meter-less. It was fun and a liberating experience.
My most memorable experience with a meter-less camera though was my first look down into a Hasselblad WLF (waist level finder). I'll never forget the sensation of seeing the almost 3D-like quality on the fresnal (ground glass). It was like peering into a small TV monitor. I did use a Luna-Pro SBC when out shooting with the 'blad most times however .
I shot a family gathering one time with my IIIf and Summitar set to f8. I may have metered once to get an idea of exposure but I shot the rest of the afternoon meter-less. It was fun and a liberating experience.
My most memorable experience with a meter-less camera though was my first look down into a Hasselblad WLF (waist level finder). I'll never forget the sensation of seeing the almost 3D-like quality on the fresnal (ground glass). It was like peering into a small TV monitor. I did use a Luna-Pro SBC when out shooting with the 'blad most times however .
neal3k
Well-known
Since I mainly shoot outdoors in the daytime, I rarely use a meter. Sunny 16 combined with the excellent latitude of the films I use makes it work for me. Lots of experience and it now comes easily whether it is sunny, cloudy or in the shade.
D
Deleted member 82967
Guest
Sorry for late reply, missed the question.
The chart is similar to one published by Adams/Archer in connection with their Zone System.
The chart gives the difference between mid-gray and objects of various reflectivities.
For example, I point my camera at the dirt. Say it says f/10 at 1/100 sec, about 13-1/3 EV.
Then mid-gray would be 13 EV, i.e. 1/3 EV lighter than mid-gray so, to get the dirt right, I increase the exposure to 13 EV.
I use EV here to describe combinations of aperture/shutter a la Exposure value - Wikipedia
There are many other ways to skin this particular cat, of course ...
Cyriljay
Leica Like
"Why meterless cameras are important to photography"
There isn't any importance of "meterless Cameras" to photography. But it is the light meter that hub and the starting point of your photo creation. As the medium of the photography is the Film and the idea of the photography being Painting photo with light You need a" photo paint pallet" to mix the paints to create a painting. Film coating chemicals are based on a light sensitivity that is recorded as ASO or ISA. If a film dose not need a particular meter /light controlling the end result is highly surprising. Any film out of any protocol of exposing to gain into a printing zone is a hit and miss effort. Using the sunny 16 rule means without meter doing / exposing a film USING AN ALTERNATIVE WAY of light reading before making photos.So light metering / and controlling it to create the image to make it need good skills. If you do the pinhole photography it needs metering too and that is why the camera on steady, be on stands for hours before accomplishing the shooting.
Light Meters are very helpful and they will facilitate to work faster and get consistent ( printable ) results on photography. It gives your time more trouble free to make better photos if you are doing photos in fast environments. You never miss any opportunity in losing unique shots.
If you believe you can make photos with out meters you'll never get a "right photo" from a negative printed (on a wet print ) under an enlarger . Exposing a film in a camera and printing a photo is the same revers act in photography.
Zone system is the main principle that is used in photography and it must be well employed and respected in both cases. Exposing a film or exposing the photo paper under an enlarger before you attained a good result.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
Using cameras without a built-in meter doesn't mean you're being haphazard.... or not metering. In fact when i stopped using cameras without a built-in meter i became more careful, thoughtful and proficient..... & i got better negatives too.
Using 8x10 and 5x7 cameras and processing my own film made me a better photographer when i used smaller formats. I wasn't constantly looking for a photo through the camera. Now i far prefer using hand held meters, and also appreciate the camera as a tool for the final framing of an image....rather than a periscope to look for a 'picture'
ptpdprinter
Veteran
If using a camera without a built-in meter makes you a more careful, thoughtful, and proficient photographer, and you get better negatives, by all means do so. It doesn't make any sense to me, but I acknowledge that people do things differently.
I don't walk around with my eye glued to a 35mm camera viewfinder, so I don't look for photographs through a camera like a periscope. I walk around with my camera at my side, and when I see I a photograph, I bring my camera to my eye, frame it and press the shutter release. That is true whether the camera has a built in meter or not.
I shoot 35mm, medium format, and large format.
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
Ptpdf..... i was talking about how using those cameras (LF) changed my photography..... not reflecting on others
ptpdprinter
Veteran
dd38..... I was commenting on what you do and sharing what I do..... not reflecting on others.
My approach is the same whether I am shooting 35mm, medium format, or large format. Obviously, large format takes a little more time and effort to set up before releasing the shutter.
Last edited:
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
“You’ll never get a ‘right’ photo…”
Technically, that’s correct. However, there’s more to the issue than that. When I first started using a Hasselblad and wanted to make spectacular prints in the style of Ansel Adams, I went through that process: I assessed the true speed of my film, spotmetered the zones, developed according to the contrast I shot in, looked at the density of my negatives, and made prints accordingly. The system worked. I can do that again, but I don’t want to.
I can make wonderful and enjoyable photos without them being technically perfect - not only are they “good enough”, they are more than good enough. Sometimes just going for a walk with a good camera and a good lens is what’s needed for the moment. I’m not advocating poorly exposed, poorly focused photos, but in the end what counts is what the viewer sees and feels.
The Spastic Image
Established
For me, the meter less camera you know well, the lens you know well, and the film for you which is tried and true, equal consistent exposures. For the challenged and adaptive man, that combo he can carry easily (meter if needed for tricky light) liberates adaptive man. Mine can fit in small spaces, go where I go!
dave lackey
Veteran
Love it! Cool!😎
Bill wrs1145
A native Texan
I have a Canon Model P and an L1 that I've used for years w/ a Luna Pro meter. I'm happy w/ this set up.
neal3k
Well-known
My system is perfect for the way I shoot and enjoy my work; it won't work for many. I mainly shoot Barnacks (and Holgas but that's another story) and I use B&W and color negative film. I mostly shoot outside and use Sunny 16 for most of my photos. Lightroom tweaks the results and I am happy. When I get into low or complex light, I might get out my smartphone meter. At night, I use a cardboard light computer (Black Cat Exposure Guide). I collect and shoot lots of cameras and don't buy cameras that uses batteries.