[rollei_list] Re: Old film

----- 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
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: