Experience with Sunny 16

Dinesh · Apr 10, 2012

Bill Burk said:
...the Johnson's Exposure Disc?

Somehow that just doesn't sound appropriate!

Steve Smith · Apr 10, 2012

Dinesh said:
Somehow that just doesn't sound appropriate!

I was sitting on the bus to work playing with my Johnson... wait, that doesn't sound right either.

Anyway, I was trying out different settings with the disc on the way to work and realised that all it was really doing was adding notches of movement when putting in the settings on one side and subtracting them from the other side so it didn't take long to work out a starting point working backwards from known sunny 16 settings.

Steve.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 10, 2012

Steve Smith said:
I was sitting on the bus to work playing with my Johnson... wait, that doesn't sound right either.

Anyway, I was trying out different settings with the disc on the way to work and realised that all it was really doing was adding notches of movement when putting in the settings on one side and subtracting them from the other side so it didn't take long to work out a starting point working backwards from known sunny 16 settings.

Steve.

As I finished setting up the camera, I realised I had left my exposure meter at home, so I whipped my Johnson out.....

I have an old exposure calculator that sounds very much like the Johnson but isn't. I'll dig it up and post whatever it is. I've used it, and it works pretty well.

Keith Tapscott. · Apr 10, 2012

Another guide of interest here.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/50026670@N05/5488486402/

BetterSense · Apr 10, 2012

I find that sunny 16 gives very reliable results, but the actual advice to use f/16 seems geared toward slide film. I prefer to give more shadow exposure and deliberately prefer to expose up to 2 stops more than sunny 16 when I use negative film. If I was using transparency, though, I would use sunny 16.

Keith Tapscott. · Apr 11, 2012

BetterSense said:
I find that sunny 16 gives very reliable results, but the actual advice to use f/16 seems geared toward slide film. I prefer to give more shadow exposure and deliberately prefer to expose up to 2 stops more than sunny 16 when I use negative film. If I was using transparency, though, I would use sunny 16.

I still say that an exposure meter is the best method, although sunny-16 and exposure guides can be useful and fun to try.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 11, 2012

BetterSense said:
I find that sunny 16 gives very reliable results, but the actual advice to use f/16 seems geared toward slide film. I prefer to give more shadow exposure and deliberately prefer to expose up to 2 stops more than sunny 16 when I use negative film. If I was using transparency, though, I would use sunny 16.

If I was using transparency, I'd be using a meter. 4x5 sheets are way too expensive. For that matter, so are 35mm frames.

benjiboy · Apr 11, 2012

E. von Hoegh said:
If I was using transparency, I'd be using a meter. 4x5 sheets are way too expensive. For that matter, so are 35mm frames.

I agree the cost of a meter is soon recouped by the saving of unusable exposures on expensive and increasingly difficult to get film, the effort put in to taking the shots, and processing them.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 11, 2012

benjiboy said:
I agree the cost of a meter is soon recouped by the saving of unusable exposures on expensive and increasingly difficult to get film, the effort put in to taking the shots, and processing them.

When you look at what a top quality meter sells for nowadays, there really is no excuse to go without.

BetterSense · Apr 11, 2012

If I was using transparency, I'd be using a meter.

Ok, go ahead and use a meter. And in sunlight, it's going to tell you to expose ... sunny 16 anyway.

Meters are good for tricky lighting conditions, but most natural outdoor lighting situations (sunlight, clouds, gloom, etc) are not tricky. Once you know them, it becomes pretty pointless to meter. The sun hasn't changed in a few millennia. The real challenge is making the creative decision how to expose, which the meter won't help you with anyway.

Steve Smith · Apr 11, 2012

BetterSense said:
Ok, go ahead and use a meter. And in sunlight, it's going to tell you to expose ... sunny 16 anyway.

In the normal range of daylight, I rarely use a meter with negative film. They are very useful in low light though.

Steve.

E. von Hoegh · Apr 11, 2012

BetterSense said:
Ok, go ahead and use a meter. And in sunlight, it's going to tell you to expose ... sunny 16 anyway.

The real challenge is making the creative decision how to expose, which the meter won't help you with anyway.

A meter may not help you, but it helps me a great deal in measuring brightness range and so on. I noticed (about 1975 or so) that my eyeballs aren't very good at any but comparative measurements, while film has a fixed and known sensitivity. I like to know what I have on the emulsion before I develop it. I don't believe in bracketing with six dollar sheets of film.

benjiboy · Sep 2, 2012

E. von Hoegh said:
A meter may not help you, but it helps me a great deal in measuring brightness range and so on. I noticed (about 1975 or so) that my eyeballs aren't very good at any but comparative measurements, while film has a fixed and known sensitivity. I like to know what I have on the emulsion before I develop it. I don't believe in bracketing with six dollar sheets of film.

+1, The human eyes are a very poor instrument for measuring light intensity because they automatically react and adjust to changes without the person being aware of it.

RalphLambrecht · Sep 4, 2012

they make a meter, sensitive enough for wales?Wow!

Steve Smith · Sep 4, 2012

benjiboy said:
+1, The human eyes are a very poor instrument for measuring light intensity because they automatically react and adjust to changes without the person being aware of it.

But very good at judging contrast which is what we actually do when assessing lighting conditions. During daylight hours the sun as a light source is constant. The only thing which changes it is the amount of cloud diffusing it.

Sunny 16 conditions can be judged purely on the shadow definition which is a function of cloud diffusion of sunlight.

Steve.

Diapositivo · Sep 4, 2012

I'm with Steve.
The sun is the sun. When we judge "by eye" we are not really judging by eye (which truly is a very poor instrument as it adapts brilliantly to different light conditions) but inferring from experience. The sun is always the same. The sun above a certain angle, without clouds, is always the same in most of the photographer inhabited world. Yes conditions might be tricky above the Arctic Circles but generally speaking in Rome or in Buenos Aires the sun shines the same.

Ole · Sep 4, 2012

Sunny 11-ish here in Norway, and and I was surprised to find that it was sunny 22 in Eritrea whan I was there many years ago. But 2000 m altitude near equator IS different from sea level at 60 degrees north.

michaelbsc · Sep 4, 2012

http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm

Try this.

Diapositivo · Sep 5, 2012

Ole said:
Sunny 11-ish here in Norway, and and I was surprised to find that it was sunny 22 in Eritrea whan I was there many years ago. But 2000 m altitude near equator IS different from sea level at 60 degrees north.

At 60 degrees North you rarely see the sun at a height above 45° on the horizon which is the condition in the Sunny 16 rule properly enunciated. I guess the "Sunny 16 rule" is mostly not applicable at those latitudes. Height on sea level is probably not a factor.

A program, Planetarium, in my Palm says that the Sun in Oslo at astronomical noon is 52° on the equinox. That's the maximum height the sun can reach in Oslo (noon of the equinox). So the rule can still apply in Oslo, but not very often... actually almost never!

newtorf · Sep 5, 2012

Here in SF Bay of California, sunny 16 is remarkably precise. I do often over-expose by one stop though.

Experience with Sunny 16

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency