A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Techniques » General Photography Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

spot metering help needed



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 8th 03, 04:32 PM
Michael Scarpitti
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default spot metering help needed

whodunitinc wrote in message . ..
On 6 Dec 2003 17:24:16 -0800, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

J C wrote in message . ..
On 5 Dec 2003 14:44:25 -0800,
(Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:


The problem is not 'what to point the meter at', but 'why do I need to
use this tool'? You're looking at the whole thing backwards. Simply by
bracketing exposures you can cover all reasonably likely exposures
anyway.


Now THAT and all that you posted below it, I fully agree with. Its a
good explanation.

Its also the reason that after a while the poster will find that using
a spot meter with a 35mm will be unnecessary. Because after a while he
will begin to understand the relationships in a scene just by
visualizing it in his mind, and bracketing to make sure.



Precisely.

Bracketing, to be sure, is sometimes an option, but it seems moke like
admitting I am not sure of whats happening, so to be safe, lets shoot
3 or 5 shots and that way I've covered all the bases.


It's not always POSSIBLE to be sure, no matter what we try. What's the
reflectivity of Liberace's rhinestone outfits? Do you know? How does
one meter such a thing? By experience and good estimations, to be
sure.

Sure film can be
considered cheap but gosh if you bracket lots you'll be using minimal
3 times more than you might normally use and if you are doing
panoramas consisting of 6 frames, bracketing becomes extremely
difficult to manage in post.


Only in cases of doubt. In any event, film is cheap and your time is
not.

As regard spot metering not applicable to
35mm photography,


Who said that? It has nothing to do with formats. I outlined the uses
for spot metering above.

In motion picture work, color negative film is used precisely because
of its greater latitude. Nonetheless, I often see erroneously exposed
film in the cinema. I can tell easily. So much for that claim.
  #12  
Old December 9th 03, 01:10 AM
whodunitinc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default spot metering help needed

On 8 Dec 2003 07:32:13 -0800, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:



It's not always POSSIBLE to be sure, no matter what we try. What's the
reflectivity of Liberace's rhinestone outfits? Do you know? How does
one meter such a thing? By experience and good estimations, to be
sure.

Rhinestones would produce spectral higlights which in my opinon would
not be the the best thing in the frame to meter. If I were shooting
Liberace in a rhinestone suit, I'd probably start with a reading from
his face and open up a stop and half (he's pale) . I am sure that many
of the rihinestone highlights would be blown out and that's pretty
much the effect you want.

Sure film can be
considered cheap but gosh if you bracket lots you'll be using minimal
3 times more than you might normally use and if you are doing
panoramas consisting of 6 frames, bracketing becomes extremely
difficult to manage in post.


Only in cases of doubt. In any event, film is cheap and your time is
not.

Film is not cheap (about $0.60 per 4X5 print and if you bracket by 1/2
stop that's $3.00 for a good print))...digital imaging on the other
hand is very cheap, still I like to meter when shooting digital. Mind
you it's easy enough then to bracket and throw away the bad ones. Call
me goofy, but I get satisfaction from doing it right, from
understanding the process, from knowing the why and how . I like to
shoot, and much of the pleasure I derive from it comes from
determining not just what defines the frame but also how it is exposed
and which values go where. Photography for me is more than the
"photograph", it also is the act of photographing and a large part of
that is metering. I want to be able to meter well! I don't use the P
setting with auto bracket. Your best shots, do you remember making
them or were you pleasantly surprised when you picked up the prints?

As regard spot metering not applicable to
35mm photography,


Who said that? It has nothing to do with formats. I outlined the uses
for spot metering above.

JC actually suggested that it was more appropiate for large format,
I don't disagree but still maintain it's value in 35mm.

In motion picture work, color negative film is used precisely because
of its greater latitude. Nonetheless, I often see erroneously exposed
film in the cinema. I can tell easily. So much for that claim.

Well , exposure is subjective and often times negs are flashed before
being shot or alternate processes maybe applied for mood, eg bleach
process and of course old prints can and often do lose their color,
particularily stuff from the 70's. Prints can vary depending on who
makes them and projection lamps are not always correct.No matter, not
all DPs are created/motivated equally, some meter better than others.
In fact the truly great ones are the ones that meter well, and they
don't use every light on the truck.

  #13  
Old December 9th 03, 06:17 PM
Michael Scarpitti
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default spot metering help needed

whodunitinc wrote in message . ..
On 8 Dec 2003 07:32:13 -0800, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:



It's not always POSSIBLE to be sure, no matter what we try. What's the
reflectivity of Liberace's rhinestone outfits? Do you know? How does
one meter such a thing? By experience and good estimations, to be
sure.

Rhinestones would produce spectral higlights which in my opinon would
not be the the best thing in the frame to meter.


But he's standing there on stage and you're too far away to get an
incident reading, and security won't let you any closer. You HAVE to
estimate based on the reading you get.

If I were shooting
Liberace in a rhinestone suit, I'd probably start with a reading from
his face and open up a stop and half (he's pale).


Good. Now we're getting somewhere. But the face may not be suitable
either, depending on how he's oriented to you. His back may be to you,
in which cae the suit is what is available.

I am sure that many
of the rihinestone highlights would be blown out and that's pretty
much the effect you want.

Sure film can be
considered cheap but gosh if you bracket lots you'll be using minimal
3 times more than you might normally use and if you are doing
panoramas consisting of 6 frames, bracketing becomes extremely
difficult to manage in post.


Only in cases of doubt. In any event, film is cheap and your time is
not.

Film is not cheap (about $0.60 per 4X5 print and if you bracket by 1/2
stop that's $3.00 for a good print))


....and your time is worth? What is the reward for the successful
picture?

....digital imaging on the other
hand is very cheap, still I like to meter when shooting digital. Mind
you it's easy enough then to bracket and throw away the bad ones. Call
me goofy, but I get satisfaction from doing it right, from
understanding the process, from knowing the why and how . I like to
shoot, and much of the pleasure I derive from it comes from
determining not just what defines the frame but also how it is exposed
and which values go where. Photography for me is more than the
"photograph", it also is the act of photographing and a large part of
that is metering. I want to be able to meter well! I don't use the P
setting with auto bracket. Your best shots, do you remember making
them or were you pleasantly surprised when you picked up the prints?

As regard spot metering not applicable to
35mm photography,


Who said that? It has nothing to do with formats. I outlined the uses
for spot metering above.


JC actually suggested that it was more appropiate for large format,
I don't disagree but still maintain it's value in 35mm.


Nonsense. It has nothing to do with format.

In motion picture work, color negative film is used precisely because
of its greater latitude. Nonetheless, I often see erroneously exposed
film in the cinema. I can tell easily. So much for that claim.


Well , exposure is subjective and often times negs are flashed before
being shot or alternate processes maybe applied for mood, eg bleach
process and of course old prints can and often do lose their color,
particularily stuff from the 70's.


'Elf'? C'mon, man. I see bad exposure all the time. There is a trend
to use less light nowadays, and it makes the films today look cheap.
Grainy fast films are no subsitute for watts. Light the damned scene!

Prints can vary depending on who
makes them and projection lamps are not always correct.No matter, not
all DPs are created/motivated equally, some meter better than others.
In fact the truly great ones are the ones that meter well, and they
don't use every light on the truck.

  #14  
Old December 9th 03, 11:41 PM
whodunitinc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default spot metering help needed

On 9 Dec 2003 09:17:29 -0800, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

whodunitinc wrote in message . ..
On 8 Dec 2003 07:32:13 -0800,
(Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:



It's not always POSSIBLE to be sure, no matter what we try. What's the
reflectivity of Liberace's rhinestone outfits? Do you know? How does
one meter such a thing? By experience and good estimations, to be
sure.

Rhinestones would produce spectral higlights which in my opinon would
not be the the best thing in the frame to meter.


But he's standing there on stage and you're too far away to get an
incident reading, and security won't let you any closer. You HAVE to
estimate based on the reading you get.


Hence, a 1 degree spot meter! If that don't do your too far away to be
shooting him anyway, now you're shooting the stage and perhaps
there's something else to meter.

If I were shooting
Liberace in a rhinestone suit, I'd probably start with a reading from
his face and open up a stop and half (he's pale).


Good. Now we're getting somewhere. But the face may not be suitable
either, depending on how he's oriented to you. His back may be to you,
in which cae the suit is what is available.


If you take an average meter reading from spectral highlights( eg.
sunlight reflecting off rippled water, rhinestones or chrome) and want
some shadow detail you had better bracket by more than two stops!
I am sure that many
of the rihinestone highlights would be blown out and that's pretty
much the effect you want.

Sure film can be
considered cheap but gosh if you bracket lots you'll be using minimal
3 times more than you might normally use and if you are doing
panoramas consisting of 6 frames, bracketing becomes extremely
difficult to manage in post.

Only in cases of doubt. In any event, film is cheap and your time is
not.

Film is not cheap (about $0.60 per 4X5 print and if you bracket by 1/2
stop that's $3.00 for a good print))


...and your time is worth? What is the reward for the successful
picture?

...digital imaging on the other
hand is very cheap, still I like to meter when shooting digital. Mind
you it's easy enough then to bracket and throw away the bad ones. Call
me goofy, but I get satisfaction from doing it right, from
understanding the process, from knowing the why and how . I like to
shoot, and much of the pleasure I derive from it comes from
determining not just what defines the frame but also how it is exposed
and which values go where. Photography for me is more than the
"photograph", it also is the act of photographing and a large part of
that is metering. I want to be able to meter well! I don't use the P
setting with auto bracket. Your best shots, do you remember making
them or were you pleasantly surprised when you picked up the prints?

As regard spot metering not applicable to
35mm photography,

Who said that? It has nothing to do with formats. I outlined the uses
for spot metering above.


JC actually suggested that it was more appropiate for large format,
I don't disagree but still maintain it's value in 35mm.


Nonsense. It has nothing to do with format.

In motion picture work, color negative film is used precisely because
of its greater latitude. Nonetheless, I often see erroneously exposed
film in the cinema. I can tell easily. So much for that claim.


Well , exposure is subjective and often times negs are flashed before
being shot or alternate processes maybe applied for mood, eg bleach
process and of course old prints can and often do lose their color,
particularily stuff from the 70's.


'Elf'? C'mon, man. I see bad exposure all the time.

I am certain you do.

There is a trend
to use less light nowadays, and it makes the films today look cheap.
Grainy fast films are no subsitute for watts. Light the damned scene!

Prints can vary depending on who
makes them and projection lamps are not always correct.No matter, not
all DPs are created/motivated equally, some meter better than others.
In fact the truly great ones are the ones that meter well, and they
don't use every light on the truck.


  #15  
Old December 10th 03, 04:14 AM
Michael Scarpitti
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default spot metering help needed

whodunitinc wrote in message . ..
On 9 Dec 2003 09:17:29 -0800, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

whodunitinc wrote in message . ..
On 8 Dec 2003 07:32:13 -0800,
(Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:



It's not always POSSIBLE to be sure, no matter what we try. What's the
reflectivity of Liberace's rhinestone outfits? Do you know? How does
one meter such a thing? By experience and good estimations, to be
sure.
Rhinestones would produce spectral higlights which in my opinon would
not be the the best thing in the frame to meter.


But he's standing there on stage and you're too far away to get an
incident reading, and security won't let you any closer. You HAVE to
estimate based on the reading you get.


Hence, a 1 degree spot meter! If that don't do your too far away to be
shooting him anyway, now you're shooting the stage and perhaps
there's something else to meter.


Yes, but that may be too narrow in some cases. the answer is ther'sno
substitute for experience and bracketing in some cases.



If you take an average meter reading from spectral highlights( eg.
sunlight reflecting off rippled water, rhinestones or chrome) and want
some shadow detail you had better bracket by more than two stops!


But with experience you don't have to do that...you'll know what to
do.

'Elf'? C'mon, man. I see bad exposure all the time.

I am certain you do.


In the movies that are too cheap to use lighting.

There is a trend
to use less light nowadays, and it makes the films today look cheap.
Grainy fast films are no subsitute for watts. Light the damned scene!

Prints can vary depending on who
makes them and projection lamps are not always correct.No matter, not
all DPs are created/motivated equally, some meter better than others.
In fact the truly great ones are the ones that meter well, and they
don't use every light on the truck.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Attention *ALL* owners of Ixus 500 Peter McKenzie \(remove 'nospam'\) Digital Photography 4 July 2nd 04 02:50 PM
F-stop Sweet Spot ATIPPETT Medium Format Photography Equipment 61 July 1st 04 08:56 PM
Canon Ixus 500 intrinsic metering error Peter McKenzie \(remove 'nospam'\) Digital Photography 0 June 30th 04 06:02 PM
Entry level body with spot metering? OnePrivateIndividual 35mm Photo Equipment 4 June 18th 04 09:21 AM
difficulty drum scanning negatives Jytzel Film & Labs 51 April 10th 04 08:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.