That does not negate what I posted. It in fact makes it all the more important.
wiltw said:2pm here, bright blue skies -- what OP describes...
...unless the sky is white due to fog/solid cloud cover and the ground is illuminated at f/5.6, the difference of sky vs. average scene illumination is miniscule
- meter on 18% gray card says ISO 250, 1/250 f/16 + 0.7EV.
- Spotmetering the sky it is -0.2EV darker than gray card reading
Alan Edward Klein said:If the ground is in shade, you'll exceed the stops of the film due to a normal sunny sky. Hence the need for graduated ND filters.
Edit: Set your camera or your meter to the ISO of the film, take a light reading without the sky in the view of the light meter, and use the information it gives you to set your shutter speed or aperture. Contrast is something you are dialling in yourself, maybe by not making a correct metering choice or not understanding the principles of film photography. But generally speaking film has so much latitude that you have to go a long long way from the correct exposure to think you have unworkable contrast.
Please don't edit my posts, especially when you are wrong. The guy is a beginner, he doesn't need to know about 18% grey or anything like that just yet, he wants an average result on an average day, not to be nagged at. He'll then think of victory and not defeat and become all the more interested in film photography and all its techniques. But you can help here with your expertise, if the sky should be excluded without exception where would the OP point an incident light meter should he have one?
Even a beginner can benefit from not metering with the sky in the meter field of view. I am not wrong and I am not talking about an incident meter and never was. So you are just plain wrong. Naaaaaah
I just repeated my measurements, and aiming at a dark tree stump in the shade, that measured -6.7EV from the gray card reading. Indeed, if you expose so that you retain shadow detail, both the sky and the overall sunlit scene are BOTH grossly overexposed. And a graduated ND filter would not help because sunlit areas flank either side of the the trunk in the shade.
Point your meter at the parts of the scene that matter to you, and apply your judgment in respect to the results:
View attachment 304825
These scenes are always difficult. As you say, graduated ND filters are a problem because you have ground extended into the sky. The horizon is filled up. On days like this, try to eliminate the bright sky and look for subjects on the ground that fill up the frame such as your last shot.I just did another set of measurements, as the sky conditions were different from the prior posts
Where I am, 4pm PDT, sky overhead has thin cloud cover obscuring the sun. Gray card reads ISO 250, 1/250 f/8 +0.8EV, gray card was sitting on the table in foreground
Distance sky is +2EV brighter than gray card, and far horizon there is a band of blue where the edge of the cloud cover ends, also +2EV brigher than local gray card, and the tree trunk is -2.4EV dimmer than the gray card.
As Sirius Glass mention, in this case including too much sky in a meter reading will result in overall under exposure and poor muddy colors in the shade, the tree trunk lacking detail (-4.4EV below sky's brightness), and a graduated ND would be very poorly suited for use in this scene.
This shot just taken in my works-in-progress backyard renovation. Gray card measured ISO 250, 1/250 f/8 +0.7EV.
- Shot 1 was taken at f/8 (my point and shoot's smallest f/stop). Sky is somewhat blown out, even with -0.7EV as exposed. Shot 2 is a crop of the area of the tree trunk, not much shadow detail
- Shot 3 had exposure adjusted by +1.0EV, to brighten the shadow detail yet blowing out the sky even more. Shot 4 is a crop of Shot 3 using the same crop area as Shot 2, better shadow detail
Just to illustrate the sky's influence if too much of it were included in the metering area of the camera. And the inability to apply a graduated ND.
Matt That scene could have used a graduated ND filter I believe. The land portion is too dark.
???... a filter that did not finish to school either.
Matt That scene could have used a graduated ND filter I believe. The land portion is too dark.
It was intended to be dark Alan.
The 11x14 print on my wall does a better job of imparting the mood than the screen version - something I often find to be the case.
No it is perfect. Some might burn in the sky more, but there is no need for a graduated ND filter here. There is not even a need for a filter that did not finish to school either.
???
Could you elaborate, please?
A filter that finished school is a graduated filter, one that did not drops out. Come on DS I always thought that you could keep up with the banter. <<wink>> <<wink>> <<nod>> <<nod>>
You got me completely!! I can be awfully and blindly literal sometimes (much to the amusement of my spouse and friends. That seems to have been the case here. Now I'm chuckling a lot, though...
Over-educated filters... filters with only theoretical knowledge and no practical experience... filters that are too smart for their own good... filters with tens of thousands in student loan debt... Stop me, please...
Doremus
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?