[rollei_list] Re: Old film
- From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 19:22:50 -0700
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marvin Wallace" <Marvin0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 6:44 PM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Old film
>I think that most photographers would not be using the
>leading 1950's film
> meter but the easiy available and resonbly priced western
> meter (which I
> began with) and find that compared to my modern Sekonic
> spot meter its
> rubbish.
> The point being that I am talking about spot meters; I
> don't think they even
> existed in the 50's.
> The idea is not to compare the exposure so much from each
> meter, but to
> understand that the spot meter will read a 1-5% area for
> you, and thus
> render your exposure very accurately within the available
> lighting
> situation.
> I will say that I do not have much experience with colour
> film but am
> predisposed to B&W photography.
>
There was a spot meter fairly early, at least in the
1960's It was mainly used for television where access to
sets was sometimes difficult. These were made, as far as I
can remember, by SEI and some are still around.
The main virtue of a spot meter is that it can measure
subject contrast at a distance. The identical readings can
be made with any reflected light meter provided one can get
close to the subject. Subject contrast is important but both
overall lighting level and lighting contrast are also
important. The question is whether the exposure is to be
such as to reproduce the subject brightness range accurately
or to distort it in some way.
The limited area of reading of the spot meter in no way
insures an accurate exposure. The meter simply reads
something. An old style reflected light meter held close to
the same area will give the same reading. What is one to do
with this reading? If I've read a particular light or dark
area of the subject and enter the value in the calculator
the exposure will not be correct for accurate tone rendition
of the subject. I can use the spot meter to read highlights
and shadows to get an idea of what the subject range is.
this is more helpful especially if I add a reading of a
neutral gray area. These readings will give me an idea of
the range of brightness of the subject and its average. So,
where should this go on the negative. Suppose I am
photographing a dark object on a black background. Do I want
to reproduce it in that way or do I want to make the object
appear brighter in the print. If the latter I must give the
film more exposure. An incident meter must be used with the
assumption that the tonal range of the subject is to be
recorded accurately, i.e., the dark object on a black
background is to be reproduced that way. Reflected light
readings have the advantage of indicating subject contrast
or, rather, brightness range, but are arbitrary in that they
assume that the average of high and low readings is 12% or
18% or whatever the calculator is calibrated for. A wise
operator can overcome this but he/she must understand what
the meter is reading and how it is going to relate to what
goes on the negative or transparency, and, when this is to
be printed, how it relates to the tone range of the print.
I don't think either reflected light meters or incident
meters have any lock on "accurate" exposure. Actually, I am
not so sure what "accurate exposure" means, it must be
defined in terms of the sensitometric and tone rendition
properties of the process.
The Weston meter is IMO not rubbish. Its a very useful
device, but, it will not give distant readings of small
areas. Nor will the Norwood meter in either of its guises
(as the Spectra, Don Norwood's original design, or the later
Director, a more compact meter). However, the Norwood meter,
because it can make both incident and reflected light
readings, can give a lot of information about the lighting
of scene. It can make an averaged incident reading but also,
using the flat diffuser, make narrow angle incident
readings, useful for measuring the relative contribution
different light sources. I can also make reflection readings
and is intended for making those close to the subject for
the purpose of measuring the subject brightness range, which
is affected by not not the same as, the lighing ratio. I
think the original SEI meter was also capable of measuring
light levels (i.e.,acting as a photometer) by being pointed
at lights.
The point of this long dissertation is simply that no
meter is a magic answer and no generic type is junk.
Modern meters have several advantages. One is the
sophistication of microprocessor based calculators, another
is the ability to work with a combination of steady and
flash lighting, which can be critical in modern photographic
work.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
