Light Meters for Landscapes
Jun 12, 2015 10:56:06 #
RWR
Loc: La Mesa, CA
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
I greatly respect the thoughts from Dave & Gen... (show quote)
:thumbup: You've nailed it! That's how experienced photographers work. :thumbup:
Jun 12, 2015 11:00:33 #
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
I greatly respect the thoughts from Dave & Gen... (show quote)
your hammer is extremely accurate - or should I say your aim - you hit the nail squarely on the head as far as I am concerned. And I never even read Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure" - :)
Jun 12, 2015 11:22:20 #
RWR
Loc: La Mesa, CA
Dave R. wrote:
Yes but who is counting? :thumbup:
My point is there are always differences. Not that its a bad thing but in some cases ( like a Nikon vs. canon debate ) you will NEVER get every to agree. In my book thats opinion. I do hope that some useful information can be gleaned from this thread as you point out there are facts offered.
My point is there are always differences. Not that its a bad thing but in some cases ( like a Nikon vs. canon debate ) you will NEVER get every to agree. In my book thats opinion. I do hope that some useful information can be gleaned from this thread as you point out there are facts offered.
Knowledgeable responses without a lot of contention are always pleasant to read! The OP should be satisfied. :)
Jun 12, 2015 12:33:20 #
Yes ditigal fans the camera does it all. you can shoot your 4000 shots and pick the best one and be done with it.
Jun 12, 2015 12:50:41 #
reedman
Loc: Michigan
Reflective light meters assume that everything is sees is an 18% reflective gray card. Take a photo of a black, grey and white wall in the same light with a reflective meter, and you have three different exposures, and all three images will be the same as an 18% reflective grey card. Use an incident light meter, and the exposure is the same for all 3 walls, and the tone of the wall is accurately reproduced.
Ansel Adams developed the zone system in order to produce images that are his vision for the scene. Ansel didn't have a histogram or loads of 8 by 10 film to burn guessing.
Reflective meters in the hands of a photographer with a sense of scene reflectance are very accurate.
Of course, I carry a grey card with me at all times. My Caucasian palm is zone 6, meter off the palm and open up a stop.
Ansel Adams developed the zone system in order to produce images that are his vision for the scene. Ansel didn't have a histogram or loads of 8 by 10 film to burn guessing.
Reflective meters in the hands of a photographer with a sense of scene reflectance are very accurate.
Of course, I carry a grey card with me at all times. My Caucasian palm is zone 6, meter off the palm and open up a stop.
Jun 12, 2015 12:53:45 #
Apaflo wrote:
The meter reads the light from all of those objects very accurately.
Any photographer that thinks a random light meter reading gives the correct exposure, is absolutely being fooled.
Any photographer that thinks a random light meter reading gives the correct exposure, is absolutely being fooled.
* * *
What you meter, how you use that meter, with what sort of meter you meter, none will be fooled but the photographer who doesn't know how to interpret the very precise information it offers.
This subject so often reflects the opinion that one is in better "control" of something, or should trust some feature over another, ignoring the fact that any intended exposure needs to be planned for its content, dynamic range, and the interpretation the photographer chooses..
Jun 12, 2015 13:22:18 #
Los-Angeles-Shooter
Loc: Los Angeles
Leitz wrote:
A properly functioning camera will not make a bad assumption - that is the province of an improperly functioning photographer.
Absolutely WRONG. The camera's meter assumes the subject is 18% gray. The camera will tend to underexpose a light-colored subject and over-expose a dark one. Whether landscape or people.
The problem is not as bad as in the old days of film. Because now, a slovenly photographer can look at the image he just took and slop his way toward an acceptable slovenly exposure.
However, the fact remains that hand-held meters are still vastly useful.
Jun 12, 2015 13:36:05 #
Los-Angeles-Shooter wrote:
Absolutely WRONG. The camera's meter assumes the subject is 18% gray. The camera will tend to underexpose a light-colored subject and over-expose a dark one. Whether landscape or people.
The problem is not as bad as in the old days of film. Because now, a slovenly photographer can look at the image he just took and slop his way toward an acceptable slovenly exposure.
However, the fact remains that hand-held meters are still vastly useful.
The problem is not as bad as in the old days of film. Because now, a slovenly photographer can look at the image he just took and slop his way toward an acceptable slovenly exposure.
However, the fact remains that hand-held meters are still vastly useful.
The unfamiliar photographer will fail to interpret the camera's meter, and make an exposure error and end up with gray snow (underexposure) or a pale photo of a man in a black suit (overexposure).
This cannot happen when someone knows what they are doing. Camera can only do what it is told to do. If the photographer hasn't figured out the 18% gray thing (and actually even that is wrong and it varies with the camera and hand held meter manufacturer), any good exposures will be purely accidental.
And, as I have illustrated, there are a number of shooting situations where it is impractical to use a hand held meter - and there are plenty more. A hand held meter is a good tool to know how to use, and a good photographer will know which is the best tool to use in a variety of situations.
So I will reject your notion that Leitz's statement is "absolutely wrong." You don't realize it but everything you wrote completely supports his statement.
Jun 12, 2015 14:02:09 #
Leitz
Loc: Solms
Los-Angeles-Shooter wrote:
Absolutely WRONG. The camera's meter assumes the subject is 18% gray. The camera will tend to underexpose a light-colored subject and over-expose a dark one. Whether landscape or people.
The problem is not as bad as in the old days of film. Because now, a slovenly photographer can look at the image he just took and slop his way toward an acceptable slovenly exposure.
However, the fact remains that hand-held meters are still vastly useful.
The problem is not as bad as in the old days of film. Because now, a slovenly photographer can look at the image he just took and slop his way toward an acceptable slovenly exposure.
However, the fact remains that hand-held meters are still vastly useful.
I stand by my earlier comment:
paulrph1 wrote:
I disagree. A camera makes generalizations and does not necessarily see what the photographer is seeing. What he has in his mind for a good shot. The camera does not think, it just does. [Quote]
leitz wrote:
No camera makes an assumption, good or bad. A built-in meter can only suggest a setting - the photographer must decide whether or not that setting is correct for the shot he has in mind. The same applies to a hand-held meter.
It is incredible, though, just how accurate even the simplest of modern cameras often are. Quote:
Jun 12, 2015 14:12:15 #
Yes the light meter in camera will be biased. If you have one, take an incident reading and set your camera to manual and shoot. Then turn it back to auto and shoot and you should bracket. You WILL see the difference in shadow and highlight.
Jun 12, 2015 14:12:23 #
Leitz
Loc: Solms
Gene51 wrote:
The unfamiliar photographer will fail to interpret... (show quote)
How about if every device with a light meter were labeled:
"NOTE: User Participation Required."? :lol:
Jun 12, 2015 14:18:22 #
Leitz wrote:
How about if every device with a light meter were labeled:
"NOTE: User Participation Required."? :lol:
"NOTE: User Participation Required."? :lol:
Like driving a car? Really?
Jun 12, 2015 14:20:37 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
Boy, what a great observation!
I used a hand held from the mid 50s to the mid 60s and was never so happy as when I didn't have to fiddle with one of those things!
Get shot set up, get out meter, get reading, set up camera.... oooppps the sun moved or a cloud! Damn! Start all over again!
I used a hand held from the mid 50s to the mid 60s and was never so happy as when I didn't have to fiddle with one of those things!
Get shot set up, get out meter, get reading, set up camera.... oooppps the sun moved or a cloud! Damn! Start all over again!
Jun 12, 2015 14:21:36 #
Los-Angeles-Shooter
Loc: Los Angeles
leitz wrote:
No camera makes an assumption, good or bad...
It is incredible, though, just how accurate even the simplest of modern cameras often are. Quote:[/quote]
The camera's meter DOES assume, among other assumptions, that the subject is 18% gray in reflectance. For that reason it will underexpose a light-skinned honky girl, and vastly over-expose a very dark-skinned Sri-Lankan. In various euphemistically-termed "intelligent" metering modes, the camera tries to guess what is is looking at.
No camera makes an assumption, good or bad...
It is incredible, though, just how accurate even the simplest of modern cameras often are. Quote:[/quote]
The camera's meter DOES assume, among other assumptions, that the subject is 18% gray in reflectance. For that reason it will underexpose a light-skinned honky girl, and vastly over-expose a very dark-skinned Sri-Lankan. In various euphemistically-termed "intelligent" metering modes, the camera tries to guess what is is looking at.
Jun 12, 2015 14:22:45 #
Rickyb wrote:
Yes the light meter in camera will be biased. If you have one, take an incident reading and set your camera to manual and shoot. Then turn it back to auto and shoot and you should bracket. You WILL see the difference in shadow and highlight.
Think about that. If you put an Expodisk on a camera, and use it like an incident meter, the result will be the same. If you use a reflected light meter, and you use the "average" function of your camera's meter, and you measure the exact same area, the result will be the same. If you use a handheld spot meter and the spot meter function in your camera with a 200mm lens on it, your results will be the same.
To make a valid comparison you have to make sure the camera and the meter are reading same thing. Otherwise the comparison has no value.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.