21-135 Apo All Good
Established
Timor,
Are you starting-out with a properly functioning meter that you have "nulled"? Reason that I ask is that a two-stop deviation towards over-exposure indicated to me that something is wrong. Either in setting the meter or interpreting it's reading, especially if the two-stop variation is consistent.
Exposure isn't all that tricky outside, which is why "Sunny-16" works quite well for average subjects. Only where you WANT to change "average" do you have to worry about "blowing-out" the highlights. At the proper exposure whites are white, blacks are black, and you still have SOME shadow detail.
My suggestion is two write down what your meter gives you at Sunny-16, and remember how it is biased. Then adjust your exposure accordingly.
Taking for granted that your shutter & aperture is working correctly, your film is developed for the correct time, and you shoot a test roll at Sunny-16: you should have some detail in the shadows and not blown-out highlights. Note that my best results with Tri-X were always obtained by slight over-exposure by using a 1/250th sec. shutter speed instead of 1/400th.
With practice, using a spot meter, one can find within a scene things that closely resemble a reflectance of 18%, i.e.: a fire hydrant lit by the same quality & quantity of light as the building your photographing. Knowing how to spot objects within a scene that represent the different zones of exposure and adjust to reach that zone will help you understand how to better "expose for the shadows & develop for the highlights", even if it's just a stop or stop & 1/2.
Ansel liked to use several Hasselblad backs. Each one was for a different zone, and marked as such, so he could develop them properly and separately. Several subjects on the same roll of film would therefore print similarly, since they were exposed in the same zone & developed at the same time. The use of several cameras instead of multiple backs would enable a 35mm format photographer to do the exact same thing.....
On my Minolta 3F meter, I measure full Sunny-16 in a cloudless sky with the dome of the meter fully illuminated by the Sun's rays between 11:00am and 1:00 pm. Slight adjustment of one or two tenths of a stop are normal upon changing the battery. Easiest way to set the meter is to set ISO for 125 and shutter to 1/125, then make your adjustment to get F16.0. Works great every time!
Hope this helps you some.
Dave
Are you starting-out with a properly functioning meter that you have "nulled"? Reason that I ask is that a two-stop deviation towards over-exposure indicated to me that something is wrong. Either in setting the meter or interpreting it's reading, especially if the two-stop variation is consistent.
Exposure isn't all that tricky outside, which is why "Sunny-16" works quite well for average subjects. Only where you WANT to change "average" do you have to worry about "blowing-out" the highlights. At the proper exposure whites are white, blacks are black, and you still have SOME shadow detail.
My suggestion is two write down what your meter gives you at Sunny-16, and remember how it is biased. Then adjust your exposure accordingly.
Taking for granted that your shutter & aperture is working correctly, your film is developed for the correct time, and you shoot a test roll at Sunny-16: you should have some detail in the shadows and not blown-out highlights. Note that my best results with Tri-X were always obtained by slight over-exposure by using a 1/250th sec. shutter speed instead of 1/400th.
With practice, using a spot meter, one can find within a scene things that closely resemble a reflectance of 18%, i.e.: a fire hydrant lit by the same quality & quantity of light as the building your photographing. Knowing how to spot objects within a scene that represent the different zones of exposure and adjust to reach that zone will help you understand how to better "expose for the shadows & develop for the highlights", even if it's just a stop or stop & 1/2.
Ansel liked to use several Hasselblad backs. Each one was for a different zone, and marked as such, so he could develop them properly and separately. Several subjects on the same roll of film would therefore print similarly, since they were exposed in the same zone & developed at the same time. The use of several cameras instead of multiple backs would enable a 35mm format photographer to do the exact same thing.....
On my Minolta 3F meter, I measure full Sunny-16 in a cloudless sky with the dome of the meter fully illuminated by the Sun's rays between 11:00am and 1:00 pm. Slight adjustment of one or two tenths of a stop are normal upon changing the battery. Easiest way to set the meter is to set ISO for 125 and shutter to 1/125, then make your adjustment to get F16.0. Works great every time!
Hope this helps you some.
Dave
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
Fully agreed. Incident light meters give accurate exposure in 99% of the cases. If the results are overexposed by 2 stops, the meter is way off and needs to be serviced.
timor
Well-known
Guys, thank you for taking interest in my problem. Didn't expect.
My meters; I have 2, sekonic L-398A and L-758 DR. Both I bought brand new, 398 is 2 years old, 758 one year. In incident mode both are reading the same. I shoot plethora of cameras, but mine mainstay are minoltas; X700, X570, X370 and srT. Usually when "spotting" I am getting very consistent results with anything in my stable. My way of spotting is very simple, first I measure dynamic range of my scene and knowing that I can make exposure decision. Usually I am trying not to go more then 2 stops above the darkest shadows with some detail, but it is not a stiff rule, shooting Tmax you've got to watch highlights. Usually I shoot for standard speed and my development time is close to recommended. Now my incident metering goes for the low values compared to what I can compute from spot readings, so maybe my developing time is not right ? Is not "for highlights" that's why they are "blown"?
My meters; I have 2, sekonic L-398A and L-758 DR. Both I bought brand new, 398 is 2 years old, 758 one year. In incident mode both are reading the same. I shoot plethora of cameras, but mine mainstay are minoltas; X700, X570, X370 and srT. Usually when "spotting" I am getting very consistent results with anything in my stable. My way of spotting is very simple, first I measure dynamic range of my scene and knowing that I can make exposure decision. Usually I am trying not to go more then 2 stops above the darkest shadows with some detail, but it is not a stiff rule, shooting Tmax you've got to watch highlights. Usually I shoot for standard speed and my development time is close to recommended. Now my incident metering goes for the low values compared to what I can compute from spot readings, so maybe my developing time is not right ? Is not "for highlights" that's why they are "blown"?
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
As far as I know, Sekonic meters calculate exposure for 15% grey instead of 18% like other meters, effectively underexposing by 1/3 stop.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Kodak's original research gave an average reflectance of 12-14% for outdoor subjects near Richester NY. The 18% grey card is a Munsell mid tone. It has nothing to do with any ISO speed, and not much to do with exposure meters.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
timor
Well-known
Thank you guys.
I am not such a deep student of this subject . Yet. But I also dislike to be confused and it is a good motivation for me. And I am confused.
To add to this my friend, a photographer much more technically apt then me, is having the same experience. Incident metering is giving him also 2 stops of overexposure. We both are using sekonics in incident mode, but he checked his results, unlike me, against Pentax spotmeter V. No matter, same conclusion. So once again; maybe my developing system is not right, maybe I just overdevelop being geared up for different exposure system.
Thanks for reading material. Edward, what the difference between luminosity and reflectance.
I am not such a deep student of this subject . Yet. But I also dislike to be confused and it is a good motivation for me. And I am confused.
To add to this my friend, a photographer much more technically apt then me, is having the same experience. Incident metering is giving him also 2 stops of overexposure. We both are using sekonics in incident mode, but he checked his results, unlike me, against Pentax spotmeter V. No matter, same conclusion. So once again; maybe my developing system is not right, maybe I just overdevelop being geared up for different exposure system.
Thanks for reading material. Edward, what the difference between luminosity and reflectance.
21-135 Apo All Good
Established
Timor,
Sounds to me like either an "interpretative" problem or a developing problem. By that I mean to say that which zone you're both taking the reflected readings from consistently. As we all know, Zone 5 is supposed to be "average". You just told us that you guys are metering for the shadows with your spot meters. Generally that would indicate to me that you would be over-exposing doing THIS instead of using an INCIDENT light reading, so this could be part of your confusion.
As to development for the highlights: Pulling the film will help with the highlights NOT blocking-up. So will decreased agitation! Agitation is good to the point of producing negs with even development, and beyond that just BUILDS CONTRAST AND GRAIN! The trick is to determine, through experimentation, just what you can "get away with" with limited agitation. The resultant negs will be fully detailed, WITHOUT the highlights being blocked-up. They may be a little on the "flat side", but a small increase in paper contrast makes-up for this, while yeilding over-all increased shadow detail. The sort of "Salon Neg" that everyone looks for. Some of us have found that doing this with T-Max isn't easy due to it's tendency to block-up with over-exposure. Oft times the BS agitation technique (suggested by Manufacturers) of 5 seconds of agitation every 30 seconds is the culprit for T-Max highlights blocking-up, especially over-exposing for the shadows.
Back in the "old days" we used to use Ethol UFG film developer (still available). Agitation was 5 seconds at the beginning of the processing, then simply one mild inversion & tap to release bubbles per MINUTE! Negs were always fully detailed without highlights being blocked-up. It is amazing how richly detailed those Tri-X negs are. When we demo this agitation technique in schools the teacher & kids go NUTS thinking that their films will be ruined. Instead, gaining full emulsion speed with ultra fine grain (UFG) via limited agitation, the richly detailed negs exhibit tremendous shadow detail and require less dodging & burning in the darkroom.
All this being said, Ansel would often customize his development technique to suit the subject matter, the zone he shot it in, the intensity & contrast of the light, and always take into account his water supply condition. My "trick" with Ethol UFG seemed to always work better while using distilled water to mix the developer with. Sharpness increased with no additional grain. Tap water is still O-K for rinse, fixing bath, and Perma-Wash.
Continued success with your experimentation.
Dave
Sounds to me like either an "interpretative" problem or a developing problem. By that I mean to say that which zone you're both taking the reflected readings from consistently. As we all know, Zone 5 is supposed to be "average". You just told us that you guys are metering for the shadows with your spot meters. Generally that would indicate to me that you would be over-exposing doing THIS instead of using an INCIDENT light reading, so this could be part of your confusion.
As to development for the highlights: Pulling the film will help with the highlights NOT blocking-up. So will decreased agitation! Agitation is good to the point of producing negs with even development, and beyond that just BUILDS CONTRAST AND GRAIN! The trick is to determine, through experimentation, just what you can "get away with" with limited agitation. The resultant negs will be fully detailed, WITHOUT the highlights being blocked-up. They may be a little on the "flat side", but a small increase in paper contrast makes-up for this, while yeilding over-all increased shadow detail. The sort of "Salon Neg" that everyone looks for. Some of us have found that doing this with T-Max isn't easy due to it's tendency to block-up with over-exposure. Oft times the BS agitation technique (suggested by Manufacturers) of 5 seconds of agitation every 30 seconds is the culprit for T-Max highlights blocking-up, especially over-exposing for the shadows.
Back in the "old days" we used to use Ethol UFG film developer (still available). Agitation was 5 seconds at the beginning of the processing, then simply one mild inversion & tap to release bubbles per MINUTE! Negs were always fully detailed without highlights being blocked-up. It is amazing how richly detailed those Tri-X negs are. When we demo this agitation technique in schools the teacher & kids go NUTS thinking that their films will be ruined. Instead, gaining full emulsion speed with ultra fine grain (UFG) via limited agitation, the richly detailed negs exhibit tremendous shadow detail and require less dodging & burning in the darkroom.
All this being said, Ansel would often customize his development technique to suit the subject matter, the zone he shot it in, the intensity & contrast of the light, and always take into account his water supply condition. My "trick" with Ethol UFG seemed to always work better while using distilled water to mix the developer with. Sharpness increased with no additional grain. Tap water is still O-K for rinse, fixing bath, and Perma-Wash.
Continued success with your experimentation.
Dave
bigeye
Well-known
If you can imagine how much it pisses off street people when you point a camera at them, can you imagine how "hacked off" they get when you leave the camera down, point a goofy gadget at them, then pick up the camera, fidget with it, and point that at them also.
It's a real kick in the pants.... back side
Pssst. Incident readings...
Tom Rymour
Member
I've been happily dependent on my Sekonic 'dome' since 1958. Could somebody please explain what 'reflected' readings are?
Much obliged,
Tom
Much obliged,
Tom
ironhorse
Joe DuPont
timor
Well-known
Thanks David for your comment regarding metering. The whole discussion made me do a revision of my system of exposure. So many guys simply can not be wrong, it's me. Today I had good weather and I was trying, carefully. This time my incident metering was closer to my spotting, but only as long, as I did not include reading from white clouds, which will expand the dynamic range of the scene by 1.5 to 2 stops.
Tmax 100 usually I develop in Beutler for 8 min. in 20C with even less agitation then you suggest for Ethol UFG. So here I think, I am OK. My negatives are fairly easy to print.
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
It's when you think about them for a long time.
How thoughtful! LOL
Spicy
Well-known
Just a joke -- pelican case is a solid, weatherproof, plastic case (obviously light-tight). He was joking that the only reason to have a hand-held meter is because if you don't hand-hold it, then it must remain in the case, and thus can't be used.