blond/blue eyes/pale skin : exposure?

markbarendt · Jan 11, 2012

benjiboy said:
I agree, incidental light meters are "highlight meters", and won't "blow the highlights" which is the O.Ps problem, IMO it's nothing to do with fill in flash or lighting it's purely an exposure error.

I find regularly with portraits that I want to place the background and the subject at different camera exposures. Cameras though only allow for placing one point at a time, the rest of he scene just falls around that point.

Using artificial lighting (or shading or reflectors or filters or ...) allows me to, for example; change the contrast in the scene by creating a darker background and a lighter face without needing to dodge and burn the print. The darker background helps "set a scene" where lighter skin and hair can print (a little) darker but actually look lighter, more normal.

Sometimes this can be as simple as pointing the camera up more so that the darker blue sky can be behind the subject rather than the horizon which is lighter.

Pumalite · Jan 11, 2012

Incidental light has always been preferable. It the best reason to have a handheld meter

benjiboy · Jan 11, 2012

markbarendt said:
I find regularly with portraits that I want to place the background and the subject at different camera exposures. Cameras though only allow for placing one point at a time, the rest of he scene just falls around that point.

Using artificial lighting (or shading or reflectors or filters or ...) allows me to, for example; change the contrast in the scene by creating a darker background and a lighter face without needing to dodge and burn the print. The darker background helps "set a scene" where lighter skin and hair can print (a little) darker but actually look lighter, more normal.

Sometimes this can be as simple as pointing the camera up more so that the darker blue sky can be behind the subject rather than the horizon which is lighter.

The O.P's question was about how to correctly expose for a fair skinned blond sitter outdoors in daylight and that's what I answered there was no mention in the question about the background exposure, lighting control, fill in flash or any other elements of the picture, indeed he doesn't even say if he's shooting negative film or slide film in the original post although everyone has assumed it's monochrome neg. film, which could make it a completely different ball game

markbarendt · Jan 11, 2012

benjiboy said:
The O.P's question was about how to correctly expose for a fair skinned blond sitter outdoors in daylight and that's what I answered there was no mention in the question about the background exposure, lighting control, fill in flash or any other elements of the picture, indeed he doesn't even say if he's shooting negative film or slide film in the original post although everyone has assumed it's monochrome neg. film, which could make it a completely different ball game

My apologies if it seemed that I was contradicting you. You are absolutely correct in that if the primary subject is over exposed an error has been made.

I agree that there are a fair amount of unknowns.

I was just addressing more advanced possibilities to solve the problem; your post provided an easy way to show that.

It is my belief that all to often many of the best options we have to improve our exposures are left at home or in the car. Scrims, flashes, reflectors, filters, lens hoods, spot meters, gray cards, incident meters, shot notes, whatever....

It is of course ok not to use these tools by choice, but it is nice to know they are available.

For me the choice is do I want all my subjects properly on film or do I want to control their exposure in the enlarger?

There isn't a right answer to the question as I see it.

keithwms · Jan 11, 2012

Again I say: compensating developer.

My people are so luminous in the sun, POTA might be advisable

This reminds me of the Adams Examples book, there is a little story in there about Adams taking a shot of Weston under a tree and fussing over the values on Weston's dome. Weston says just get it done or something like that.

benjiboy · Jan 12, 2012

markbarendt said:
My apologies if it seemed that I was contradicting you. You are absolutely correct in that if the primary subject is over exposed an error has been made.

I agree that there are a fair amount of unknowns.

I was just addressing more advanced possibilities to solve the problem; your post provided an easy way to show that.

It is my belief that all to often many of the best options we have to improve our exposures are left at home or in the car. Scrims, flashes, reflectors, filters, lens hoods, spot meters, gray cards, incident meters, shot notes, whatever....

It is of course ok not to use these tools by choice, but it is nice to know they are available.

For me the choice is do I want all my subjects properly on film or do I want to control their exposure in the enlarger?

There isn't a right answer to the question as I see it.

No apology s necessary Mark and no offence intended on my part, I know I can be pedantic at times

blond/blue eyes/pale skin : exposure?

markbarendt

Pumalite

benjiboy

markbarendt

keithwms

benjiboy

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency