[rollei_list] Re: Old film

I agree with Jerry.  What is wrong with Eastern
meters, particularly those from Newark, New Jersey?

John

--- Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Marv,
> 
> Unless you understand the Zone System, the spotmeter
> is f*#&ing useless!
> 
> Which "western" meter are you talking about?  What
> is wrong with eastern
> meters?
> 
> Jerry
> 
> Marvin Wallace wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Richard Knoppow
> > Sent: 31 May 2005 08:06
> > To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Old film
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Marvin Wallace" <Marvin0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 5:34 PM
> > Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Old film
> >
> > > An interesting distinction here between the
> photographer
> > > and the collecter.
> > > A Rollei a 1960's Planar will give equal or
> better results
> > > than the modern
> > > equivalent; old film is not as good as modern
> film; older
> > > b/w papers are
> > > sometimes better because of the higher silver
> content.
> > > And ask for old light meters ! A modern light
> meter will
> > > give a more
> > > accurate measurement of light; so that the
> lighting
> > > conditions can be more
> > > accurately translated to film (modern film)
> which records
> > > better.
> > > I am always surprised that people use old meters
> the
> > > modern equivalents are
> > > much better.
> > > An analogy regarding the use of light meters
> would be, the
> > > USA making a
> > > Space Rocket and then using a compass as the
> guidance
> > > system.
> > > Marvin.
> > >
> >    Part of the reason is cost. Modern exposure
> meters are
> > quite expensive. Older meters can be cheap. Also,
> the
> > difference in "accuracy" is not that great. A good
> older
> > meter will usually agree with a more modern one as
> far as a
> > simple reading. Also, exposure is to some extent
> relative,
> > no matter how sophisticated the meter the
> photographer must
> > still understand what he/she is reading and the
> relation to
> > what the film is recording.
> >   Modern films are better than the older ones in a
> couple of
> > ways, particularly having finer grain and better
> > resolution/sharpness. However, as far as tone
> rendition, I
> > am not sure there has been much change. Its easy
> to find 60
> > or 70 or more year old negatives that make very
> good prints.
> >   Paper is another problem. I am not at all sure
> that modern
> > papers are as good as those of the past but, of
> course,
> > since one can not directly compare, its impossible
> to know.
> > >From published data modern papers are certainly
> capable of
> > higher Dmax than those of, say, 1950, but Dmax is
> not the
> > alpha and omega of paper performance.
> >    Speaking of papers I have just been testing
> Freestyle's
> > Arista Edu, which at a guess is Kentmere. Its on a
> somewhat
> > light weight base but otherwise seems to be nice
> paper and
> > is relatively cheap. It curls more than either
> Kodak or
> > Agfa.
> >
> > ---
> > 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
> >
> > ---
> > 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
> 
> ---
> 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
> 
> 

---
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: