Averaging Meter Readings

[Alan Edward Klein]

I have a 10 degree reflective and incident meter that can average three readings. How do you do it? What areas do you measure? I do not develop or print myself but rather by a pro developer and don;t want to work with pushing or pulling. I shoot landscapes. I will bracket. I often scan the results for the web and UHDTV displays.
1. Color Velvia 50: ________?
2. BW Tmax 100: ___________?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I shoot all film at box speed. The secret is to take the light reading without the sky in view.

If I am taking photographs in the snow, a dark small subject on a bright background or a light small subject on a dark background. I use an incident meter. From the subject location [or some place equivalent] I aim the meter towards to camera location to take the reading.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I have a 10 degree reflective and incident meter that can average three readings. How do you do it?

No mystery there, although 10 degrees is very wide for a spot meter and overlap of adjacent tones could throw off straight and averaged measurements.

With RVP50 I [1 degree] spot between 2 and 8 (most commonly 4), adding a mid-tone either from the within the scene or a grey card at the end, and averaging. But a mid-tone is not strictly necessary if you are going to straight average, but small differences can be seen in films like Velvia in a mix of shadows and illuminated areas. There are a few customisations to my meter which take measurements and averaging for a more technical level, mostly to provide for a slight 'key' that is required for hybrid printing (where some illumination from the scene is lost).

Outback Australia, where the colours and contrast are very, very intense during the day, in the morning and again in the evening as the light begins to soften (granite boulders, plateau, caves, ghost gums, etc.) [Sirius, take note of this!] is the only place really where I would re-rate RVP50 at EI40, or consider switching to Provia.

None of my metering includes any part of the sky unless there are elements in it critical to aesthetics or complimentary to the main image e.g. afterglow in the evening sky is metered, so too is early dawn light, as in both instances the light is reflected on the landscape (especially water).

B&W is much less critical to meter than transparency film, for obvious reasons of generous latitude, but care with tones and spectral influences must still be considered.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I bracket +1 and -1 stop with both B/W Tmax 100 and Velvia 50. What would you recommend?

 

[Trail Images]

Alan, I only shoot V-50. After 30 years I've tried most everything in color transparency stuff. But V-50 is where I get the results I want. I use a Sekonic 758 both in incident and spot metering. I mostly use the spot metering for landscapes during sunrise and sunset. It's the only time I feel good about the very marginal total exposure latitude of V-50. Unless of course it's total shade or using a shade cover for closeup / macro.
What seems to keep my exposures close enough to work with in PS is averaging the extreme high & low. Keeps clouds and sky in range and not blowing out with deep shadow not totally black either. I can't say that it is not a bit of eyeball engineering too. After years of using the fussy stuff I know what will not work more so then what will work. If that makes sense.
I've made changes to my Sekonic 758 settings to work a bit more like my old Minolta Spot Meter. It's just changes to make the index finger button and the thumb buttons reversed for easier use or what I'm use to and not the default button settings way.
btw: any exposures over 4 second readings I faithfully use a reciprocity table I made up. Again, keeps my exposures good enough to work on in PS. If I could not use PS in the end I guess I'd need digital......UGH!

 

[Paul Howell]

I would forget about averaging 3 reading, with a narrow range meter, I used a Weston Ranger 9, I meter the foreground by shading the meter with my hand or hat, or you can use your meter in incident mode, in most cases an incident meter will give you an accurate reading. Lately I use a 35mm or digital camera usually in either average mode or matrix, sometimes in spot mode. I have even put a white styrofoam on the lens and used an incident meter. I have not use used V-50 but my guess that like slide film a matrix reading will work well. In really tricky lighting, bracket 2 stops up and down.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Alan, I only shoot V-50. After 30 years I've tried most everything in color transparency stuff. But V-50 is where I get the results I want. I use a Sekonic 758 both in incident and spot metering. I mostly use the spot metering for landscapes during sunrise and sunset. It's the only time I feel good about the very marginal total exposure latitude of V-50. Unless of course it's total shade or using a shade cover for closeup / macro.
What seems to keep my exposures close enough to work with in PS is averaging the extreme high & low. Keeps clouds and sky in range and not blowing out with deep shadow not totally black either. I can't say that it is not a bit of eyeball engineering too. After years of using the fussy stuff I know what will not work more so then what will work. If that makes sense.
I've made changes to my Sekonic 758 settings to work a bit more like my old Minolta Spot Meter. It's just changes to make the index finger button and the thumb buttons reversed for easier use or what I'm use to and not the default button settings way.
btw: any exposures over 4 second readings I faithfully use a reciprocity table I made up. Again, keeps my exposures good enough to work on in PS. If I could not use PS in the end I guess I'd need digital......UGH!

Paul, Your pictures on your site are first class.
1.How do you use the spot on landscape during sunrise and sunset?
2. When you said that the only time you feel good about V50's marginal total exposure latitude except ion shade, what did you mean?
3. Do you use Velvia's reciprocity tables?
4. How do you scan?
Thanks
Alan

 

[Trail Images]

Alan, I'll try to answer the best I can to your questions. I try to always work during the sunrise and sunset cycles as the contrast is much easier to deal with. Velvia 50 does not like challenging exposure latitudes as you already know. If I was pushed into harsher light often I suppose I'd try Provia. It does not have the nasty issues like V-50, but at the same time it does not supply the same outcome either.I do use also use Grad and Reverse Grad filters if the latitude is too much for my TOD shots.

1.How do you use the spot on landscape during sunrise and sunset? I spot meter the brightest point I can find and the darkest point in the scene. Keep in mind this is before direct sunlight actually starts hitting the subject area. Using the two points I just press the "average" button on the Sekonic 758 to get my reading that I then use. Another item I check on the meter is the scale between high & low readings. Again that is visible on the meter once I've pressed the average button. That tells me if I'm exceeding the total range of 3 stops of the V-50. Basically just looking to see +1.5 and -1.5 below the zero point.

2. When you said that the only time you feel good about V50's marginal total exposure latitude except ion shade, what did you mean? In the shade without the brighter sky involved I typically just use the incident meter especially for closeup / macro work. Under those circumstances the contrast is more consistent.

3. Do you use Velvia's reciprocity tables? This is the list I've used. Number on the left is what the meter reading suggests. Number on the right is the number used to adjust for reciprocity. Any reading below 4 seconds just use the meter reading and no increase required for reciprocity issues.
4 sec > 5 sec
8 sec > 12 sec
10 sec > 16 sec
12 sec > 19 sec
16 sec > 28 sec
20 sec > 39 sec
25 sec > 49 sec
30 sec > 1 min
32 sec > 1 min 6 sec
40 sec > 1 min 28 sec

4. How do you scan? I use a Microtek i900 flatbed and Silverfast software. I do not do a lot of fancy adjustments prior to the scan. Changes are just easier in PS with layers. 4x5 scanned @ 1800 ppi and 6x7cm @ 2400 ppi.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Thanks. Alan

 

[Trail Images]

Thanks. Alan

Alan, you're welcome. I hope this may have been of help. Velvia 50 is great when it's right, but tough when it is wrong. I wish it had a couple more stops over the narrow 3 it seems to safely run with.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Paul, These are my Velvia's. Any suggestions?
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort...1&tags=velvia&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

 

[Trail Images]

Alan, those images are very nice IMO. I did see maybe a couple that were out of Velvia's wheelhouse for exposure. Typically when it has lost the battle the dark's are inked up and or the bright's are blown out and when scanned the pixels are just not there to work with. I only saw one like that and maybe 2 others that just needed some more TLC in PS work.
The one with the swan was the one that was too much for the V-50. The shadows were inked up and the tall brush on the left looked like it was almost too hot. So the exposure limit was too far apart. But, in the end they're still fine images IMO. Even the one with the swan. That is one that might be hard to change in PS overall. All the others have a solid natural look and are very good images.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I bracket +1 and -1 stop with both B/W Tmax 100 and Velvia 50. What would you recommend?

Alan,
I don't bracket at all for either TMax or RVP50. Everything is spotted with a Sekonic L758D and right first time off. If it isn't right, then the problem is with me, not the film!

I would need to understand what scenes you are photographing and why you are bracketing (for web or for print)?

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Paul, These are my Velvia's. Any suggestions?
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=velvia&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

I have seen a number of these before, and also addressed one specifically some time ago (winter landscape, where you reported that you thought you'd be shot for trespass!?).

I don't see any obvious problems with metering, and the scenes are dovetailed into RVP50's exposure range. I probably would have double-weighted metering of the edge of the shadowed areas in the image of the swan, just to bring them up a bit.

What profiles have been applied to the images in the Flickr hive? They all look quite enriched which is a little unusual for RVP50, but it could also be the variation in viewing on a tablet, a phone, a PC and a MAC!!

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I wish it had a couple more stops over the narrow 3 it seems to safely run with.

I would hazard an educated guess that it behaves much better at +/- 2.5 stops!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have not bracketed for years. On very rare occasion I will take one photograph and then take another offset by 1/2 f/stop or 1 f/stop.

 

[Trail Images]

Alan,
I don't bracket at all for either TMax or RVP50. Everything is spotted with a Sekonic L758D and right first time off. If it isn't right, then the problem is with me, not the film!

I would need to understand what scenes you are photographing and why you are bracketing (for web or for print)?

I totally agree. The 758 has kept me out of trouble with regard to unusable photos. I do not bracket either.

 

[Sirius Glass]

There are many good light meters with or without incident capability. The only problem to consider is the type of battery needed and its availability. The option choices are:

reflective
incident
spot
flash
EV readout
filter compensation
Zone System​

Make your choice and pay your money.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The pictures of the swan were actually lighter in the shadows after the scan. For some reason, when I edited for the web, I decided for aesthetic reasons to try leaving the shadows extra black. I over did it. When I shot the picture, the lighting was failing and I had to shoot at a 1/4 second. I was lucky the swan was hardly moving much.

Regarding bracketing, I guess I've been lazy and it's also become a habit. Since I shoot MF, taking two extra shots isn't a big deal since I'm shooting landscapes. I probably don't need to bracket most of the time but I've gotten use to it.

Regarding color profiling, I don't use it. What I do is after I scan (flat), I then adjust the pictures to the lighting, colors and contrast I find pleasing. I really don't try to match the original Velvia's colors. But I'm sure they follow to a certain extent.

 

[Trail Images]

Regarding color profiling, I don't use it. What I do is after I scan (flat), I then adjust the pictures to the lighting, colors and contrast I find pleasing. I really don't try to match the original Velvia's colors. But I'm sure they follow to a certain extent.

Regarding color profiling, do you profile your monitor? Your scanning and PS adjustment approach sounds solid to me.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Regarding color profiling, do you profile your monitor? Your scanning and PS adjustment approach sounds solid to me.

Most of the pictures I edited that are on Flickr were done with a older NEC monitor. Although there was no color calibration, there was, if I recall, a way of adjusting brightness using a gray wedge type program. My current monitor is a NEC PA242W with Spectraview II color calibration set to emulate sRGB. So I very confident of the accuracy of the colors I'm seeing on the monitor.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Getting back to how I adjust colors to my liking rather than trying to emulate the Velvia-50 palette, my theory is that the final adjustments should be to my aesthetic liking. Not to match the eye of some dead Japanese designer who use to work for Fujicolor. But, I do enjoy the Velvia palette, but my results don't have to copy it's palette exactly. That raises the question if I'd be better off shooting another film. Maybe Portra?. Although it's palette is much flatter, it scans very easily, it's faster, and I could push the colors and contrast in post processing. Has anyone tried that over using Velvia to start with? Positives and negatives? Maybe another film?

 

[Trail Images]

Getting back to how I adjust colors to my liking rather than trying to emulate the Velvia-50 palette, my theory is that the final adjustments should be to my aesthetic liking. Not to match the eye of some dead Japanese designer who use to work for Fujicolor. But, I do enjoy the Velvia palette, but my results don't have to copy it's palette exactly. That raises the question if I'd be better off shooting another film. Maybe Portra?. Although it's palette is much flatter, it scans very easily, it's faster, and I could push the colors and contrast in post processing. Has anyone tried that over using Velvia to start with? Positives and negatives? Maybe another film?

Alan, by all means making color adjustments is the only way to go in working with any scan, at least for me. I find any transparencies I've used have their own personal "leaning" tendencies or casts.
I cannot offer help or thoughts on negative films, I only use V-50.