[pure-silver] Re: Need help with exposures, please, - Peter

Kent M. Gibbs

----- Original Message ----
From: Kent Gibbs <kent_gibbs@xxxxxxxxx>
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 7:08:10 AM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Need help with exposures, please, - Peter


Why do you think I need to compensate for relative 
gloss?  Like I said, the subject might be flat or 
glossy black, or flat or glossy white.  It makes no 
difference and requires no compensating guesswork with 
a spot meter.  

I misunderstood your statement here.  However, a glossy surface is always going 
to reflect more light than a matte surface.


Your exact reading and exposure based on that reading is going to render your 
subject 18% gray.  All meters are calibrated to 18% gray.  It's the industry 
standard.  Metered white will be rendered gray, metered black will be rendered 
gray.  Now you can take readings of the highlights and shadows and average them 
to compute a middle gray for the scene.  Or you can decide which is more 
important (shadows or highlights) and move that reading up or down to suit.

But, the meter is still reading 18% gray.

Further, when you use an incident meter you point it at the camera when 
shooting negative film, not the subject.  Reading the light only and no 
reflectance from the subject.  With the diffuser dome installed, the amount of 
light reaching the sensor is reduced in a controlled way so that all of the 
light and dark areas in front of meter are averaged to 18% gray.  No 
compensation needed unless you want to emphasize the shadows or the highlights.

Exactly, unaffected.  Like you and I are saying, 
incident meters are totally unaffected by the light 
you're trying to photograph, so there is little chance 
that there will be any correlation between an incident 
reading and any light that your film might see.

I don't see how you believe there is no correlation between what the meter sees 
and what the film sees.  The are both seeing the same light.

All you are measuring is the light falling on the subject.  Now if you want to 
compensate for the inverse-square law, go for it.

Yes, and you can guess how far to stick the meter under 
the bush after you have guessed like this that the 
situation is tricky for an incident meter.

You don't stick it under the bush.  If you want to meter the shadows only, you 
put your hand between the meter and the light source.  No tricks.  

How do you know when and how much a 
scene will be tricky?  Do you guess, or do you meter 
with a spot meter first so you are working with real 
information as you guess where to point your incident 
meter?

No guessing, meter the light falling on the scene (aimed at the camera for 
negative film or at the subject for transparency film).  All done, no 
calisthenics.

The only real time an incident reading falls apart is when metering directly 
into the sun.  In which case, metering at a 90 deg angle to the sun will give 
you a usable starting reading.

Take care,

Kent


=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your 
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) 
and unsubscribe from there.





============================================================================================================To
 unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account 
(the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and 
unsubscribe from there.





============================================================================================================To
 unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account 
(the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and 
unsubscribe from there.

Other related posts: