Exposing for Slides

antonyg · Sep 21, 2008

I have started taking more photographs with Slide E6 film. I heard that slide must be exposed for the highlights, ie so their fragile details will not be lost. Would a highlight be a light source ie Sun. I am confused as Slide has a small latitude, do I take two exposure readings and average them out, i.e Highlight and lowlight (shadow). Or put more simply how do you exposure for Slides

Kevin Caulfield · Sep 21, 2008

It's more detailed than just measuring the highlight and lowlight values. You really need an incident or ambient reading, and you need to know the exposure range, that is, how much of a difference there is between the highlights and lowlights of your particular scene.

Kevin Caulfield · Sep 21, 2008

Just to add a little more, if you took a meter reading for a higjlight and for a lowlight and averaged them, you could be in trouble, because slide film has a very limited range. It's a matter of choosing the right average for your particular shot.

frdrx · Sep 21, 2008

Under favourable circumstances it is not at all difficult, and you don't really need anything better than a centre-weighted meter. Just measure off your subject and compensate if necessary. If conditions are not ideal, expose for the highlights so as not to blow them away. Measuring off the highlights allows you to control their appearance. You can safely overexpose them by about two stops. Usually is better to sacrifice some shadow detail, though. It all depends on your intentions, however, so experiment and do a little bracketing. If you've ever taken pictures with one of those filmless cameras, you probably have a good idea of how slide film reacts to different exposures, except that film handles washed-out bits with far more grace.

markbarendt · Sep 21, 2008

Two thoughts;

1- For my shooting the exposure is purely dependant on the subject, the high or low in the scene just need to be acceptable, not perfect. Shooting slides, if I I'm off on the subject's exposure the image is trash even if I technically got the highlights and shadows right.

2- One of the various reasons I switched back to film was to support #1. Film's transition to blown highlights, in slides or negs, is much more acceptable than digital's IMHO.

My daughter races Kayak's, I expose brighter than some might because I can acceptably let more of the whitewater blowout than shadows in this type of scene. This is true just about any time I have a person in the frame, the person trumps the rest of the frame.

I'm shooting Provia right now and like what it does but will be trying some Astia soon to see if I get a bit more lattitude, just wish Astia came in iso 400. ;-)

nemo999 · Sep 21, 2008

antonyg said:
I have started taking more photographs with Slide E6 film. I heard that slide must be exposed for the highlights, ie so their fragile details will not be lost. Would a highlight be a light source ie Sun. I am confused as Slide has a small latitude, do I take two exposure readings and average them out, i.e Highlight and lowlight (shadow). Or put more simply how do you exposure for Slides

Need to know what gear you have. If you have a camera with good matrix metering, this will deliver in approx. 97% of all situations. If you have spot metering (either built-in or separate), giving 2 stops more than the spot reading will deliver a good result every time (although giving 3 stops more, or placing the highlight on zone 8) may be more pleasing. Try a test roll bracketing on 2 and 3 stops more than a spot highlight reading - when you see the results, this should give you a good guide as to where to go from here. The sun should not be used as a highlight for a reflected measurement unless it actually appears in your picture. The "highlight" is the brightest area in the picture as you have framed it.

keithwms · Sep 21, 2008

Antony, for slide exposures that really matter to me (i.e. 5x7 velvia or such), I use a matrix colour meter with histogram output for each colour channel... in other words, a Nikon digicam. They do make nice meters and I regard them as a reasonably cost-effective alternative to polaroid

Poisson Du Jour · Sep 21, 2008

"Expose for the highlights" holds true for reversal film. Patchy areas of solid black in an image, where shadows have no detail, are more acceptable than bleached (or 'blown') highlights. If an image has vast areas of deep, featureless black, the lighting has not been read correctly. Diffuse light (overcast, hazy) favours Velvia. Point light (clear sunny sky with deep shadows) is not a design intention of Velvia: it looks just awful in bright light, though some landscape photographers do exploit this. Spectral highlights can be managed using a polariser, taking care to increase the exposure if you flatten spectrals across the scene, otherwise the result will look very dull and flat, even if primaries are enhanced (with Velvia, that's the greens, especially, then reds).

If your camera has a spot meter, meter from a highlight (this will be the brightest part of the scene where you want to record detail) then a shadow (as a reference)between these no more than 2.3 stops) and mid-tone (the proverbial 18% grey or Zone V, i.e. grey stone, granite, wood, a lot of light autumnal foliage...), then average all three these readings. This is a good start. You can of course take multiple readings. Cameras that have an exposure scale make this averaging more meaningful (to a point) by moving locked readings for hi/lo/mid-tone up or down until the averaged reading sits within a comfortable exposure range. It won't however always appear 'just so' like this, which is where you must apply judgement. Diffuse light will return the best results with Velvia and Kodak reversal stock. There are ways you can get smart: a hand-held meter in incident mode can be used (remember to include filter factor and ISO speed as per what you have on the camera). While useful, incident readings only measures illumination over the scene, while spot metering takes into account individual luminances on various elements in the subject; this is thorough, but also time consuming, requiring an understanding of applying Zone System principles (in contracted form i.e. 5 stops and not 11). Tranny film is wonderfully rewarding to view on the light table when you work within its limitations.

I concur that matrix and evaluative metering systems do an excellent job in the right circumstances, but they don't know that the film you have loaded in the camera has a narrow latitude and they don't care, so don't put all your eggs in the one basket, but do be prepared to take control away from the camera's assertions for learning purposes.

MattKing · Sep 21, 2008

The highlight you meter from should almost never be the light source.

It should be the lightest part of your subject that you wish to retain detail in.

You need to be careful with reflective or specular surfaces.

You need to think about what you want the result to be. Some times, it is better to blow out a small bit of the highlights than to lose too much of the shadows. Only you, the photographer can decide.

I'd suggest finding a good test subject, with a wide range of brightnesses, and try a few readings and settings, to see what results - just be sure to keep good notes or even include a card showing exposure settings in the slides themselves.

One caution - you should evaluate the results using a good viewing system. A slide projector is best.

Matt

reellis67 · Sep 22, 2008

MattKing said:
The highlight you meter from should almost never be the light source. It should be the lightest part of your subject that you wish to retain detail in.
<snip>
You need to think about what you want the result to be. Some times, it is better to blow out a small bit of the highlights than to lose too much of the shadows. Only you, the photographer can decide.

Matt

This has been my experience as well. It takes a little time to get the hang of transparency film, but if you are mindful of conditions when you review the results you will learn fairly quickly. I find that as a general rule, exposing E-6 in strong light (high contrast) is not a good idea unless you have something very specific in mind. The best conditions I've found are anything from flat to 'normal' contrast - in these types of light I find that getting a good result is fairly easy without a lot of light meter gymnastics.

When you start out, record the details, or at least record a summary of the general conditions and how you metered. Then when you review the slides double check those notes so that you can build an understanding of what results you will get under various conditions. It sounds more complicated than it really is, and after a while you will 'see' the results when you consider the shot.

While you should not get overly complicated until you have a good base understanding, like anything really, you might keep this in mind - I've found that a slight underexposure will result in richer colors, at least in my experience. I often cut the exposure by up to 1/2 stop (unless the light is very even) to give the colors a little help. It keeps them from getting too washed out, although you can lose shadow details in the process. Again, as Matt stated, you have to know what you want to get, what is important, and then make your adjustments based on that concept.

- Randy

nsouto · Sep 23, 2008

markbarendt said:
I'm shooting Provia right now and like what it does but will be trying some Astia soon to see if I get a bit more lattitude, just wish Astia came in iso 400. ;-)

pssst: try Provia 400X out. It is simply amazing!

nsouto · Sep 23, 2008

antonyg said:
I heard that slide must be exposed for the highlights, ie so their fragile details will not be lost. Would a highlight be a light source ie Sun. I am confused as Slide has a small latitude, do I take two exposure readings and average them out, i.e Highlight and lowlight (shadow). Or put more simply how do you exposure for Slides

Be wary of the "one size fits all approach." Colour reversal film has less latitude than others, but it's not a total disaster! I use mostly Astia and Velvia, with a bit of Provia 400X thrown in (expensive!...).

Most of the time I let the matrix or CW meter do the work. Only when it's a tricky lighting situation do I go into "highlight mode". Then I just spot meter on the lightest spot I want detail from, open up 2 and go from there.
Of course: there are exceptions to every rule.
Going by range of exposure is another approach I use: +2/-2 is a good range for most slide films with Astia coping quite well with +2.5/-3, in my experience.

It's been a loong while since I used K64 so I can't comment on that one. But I plan to correct that soon!

Ira Rush · Sep 27, 2008

Many, many years ago when Kodachrome was king, a professional photographer friend of mine let me in on his secret to achieve bold rich and enhanced colors.

This technique really requires you to think first about the subject and the composition of the shot and whether or not you want highlights or shadow detail.

This technique works best with landscape, fall foliage, or where "highlights" are more pronounced than shadow detail, and that is what you want in the final image.

In short, he would rate K64 at ISO/ASA 80, rather than at 64. Doing this of course creates an underexposed shot, which causes the film to receive less light, the images are darker, but the color looks bolder. This will however cause any shadow detail to pretty much fade to black.

As stated in prior post, transparency film (slide) has little tolerance for exposure error as compared to negative film, but depending on what you want to achieve, this technique might just surprise you with how the colors look.

Once again, many, many years ago, when in NYC there were as many K-14 labs around as there are now "Starbucks", he would usually have the film processed normally or push it at most 1/2 to 1 stop.

Remember; 1) slide film there are no second chances, so experiment to get the effects you want and

2) try to find a lab that will even take Kodachrome.

Of course you could try this with E-6 processing and see what you get.

Hope this helps
Ira

benjiboy · Oct 9, 2008

The most useful thing I ever learned as a teenager about exposing slide film was that because it's reversal film unlike the Neg/positive process the the more exposure you give it the lighter the results are.

Doremus Scudder · Oct 10, 2008

I don't see why this needs to be so complicated...

If you do not plan on using development time changes to control contrast, there is only one way the film responds:

1. If detailed highlights are important, then meter an area in the scene that you wish to appear white with still some detail and open up two stops. If your results are not quite what you want, adjust the amount you open up. After a couple tests, you will have your system. With Subject Brightness Ranges (SBR) that exceeds the range of the film, the shadows will be sacrificed. This is usually preferable to burning out the highlights

2. If mid-tones are more important, meter them and place them appropriately. Skin -- open one stop; middle grey, shoot as metered. Again, refine as needed. Keep in mind that highlights may "burn out" if the SBR is great.

3. Bracket. There's really no substitute for this with reversal film. Use half-stops on either side. That should do for most things. Use smaller intervals for more critical things. Shoot lots; throw away lots.

This takes care of 99% of the situations.

Best,

Doremus Scudder

timparkin · Oct 12, 2008

This might be useful..

Dead Link Removed

I've done some research asking some pro landscape photographers in the UK and they tend to meter for highlight first (brightest part of scene that you want with colour) and check the highlights in different parts of the scene (i.e. you might have a sky with white clouds above a river with white water. If you measure both highlights and they are different then you might need a grad filter).

Once you've done this and worked out if you need a grad filter, you can then see where this will leave the other tones in your picture (deduct 2 stops from the highlight value - or 1 2/3 stops if the highlight value needed texture). This will really tell you if your shot can work at all... if the rest of the picture ends up too dark then you are fairly stuffed unless you can grad more.. If the rest of the picture is too light then you could reduce the exposure and then boost the contrast in photoshop later?

Finally, check your shadows (highlight -5) to see if anywhere is going to be completely black..

Sounds complicated but in the field it generally only takes four or five readings with a spot meter. I don't know anyone who uses 'averaging' to get an exposure reading...

Tim

gr82bart · Oct 12, 2008

Expose for for what it is you want 'shown' in the slide, but realize how the image will look in the 'other' side. Make it up with composition as well. If there will be an area of the slide the will be over/under, then you're going to to have to decide how the composition can use the over/under area to assist the image, versus distract from the image.

Here are two examples. In the fountain image, I exposed for the highlight, knowing that the fountain itself will be completely blacked out. In the other I exposed for Amanda knowing that the wall, which was a light blue, will be completely blanked out. In both cases I made minor exposure adjustments to ensure there is some detail, but I knew there wouldn't be much. In the fountain, if there were more details in te fountain, it wouldn't have added to the image. With Amanda, I could have added some reflected on her to 'even' out the lighting, but it wouldn't have been so dramatic.

And, remember this is my vision. Your vision will be different, but you need to understand light and transparency characteristics.

Regards, Art.

markbarendt · Oct 12, 2008

I think Art is right on the money, for me proper exposure of the subject i.e. Amanda, trumps the rest of the frame. If the rest of the frame is important then like Art says you have to artificially fill the shadows to balance the exposure.

23mjm · Oct 12, 2008

I know everyone is talking about technique, but lets talk about equipment, when I started shooting slides (Provia/Velvia) I tried manual metering with my handheld--it went OK but not as good as I wanted. So I started using my F100 as a light meter. It has always given me great results in the past (95%+ accuracy) so I use it and transfer the reading to my MF or LF. It's kinda bulky but hey it works. I use the Matrix Metering 90% of the time.

Poisson Du Jour · Oct 12, 2008

23mjm said:
I use the Matrix Metering 90% of the time.

The emphasis is still on technique rather than equipment, here's why:
The reason a matrix meter gives better results is that all evaluative, matrix, 3D or other-named meters are all programmed along the good old Zone System (it's no secret). These "intelligent" metering systems recognise unusual lighting conditions where otherwise you'd be the one doing all the thinking using CWA (centre-weighted average). You would get the same results with a [handheld] spotmeter if you were a virtuoso in the Zone. A more meaningful reading would be obtained by using a comparative meter i.e. the spot meter in your F100, which is exclusive of any influence from matrix (bearing in mind that you cannot use a modern SLR with the metering system turned off, that is to say, pure 100% manual with external metering).

gr82bart · Oct 12, 2008

Hmmm ... my spelling and grammar has severely imploded! WTF did I write? I read like Jacob Two Two and the Hooded Fang.

Regards, Art.

Poisson Du Jour · Oct 12, 2008

gr82bart said:
[...]If there will be an area of the slide the will be over/under, then you're going to to have to decide how the composition can use the over/under area to assist the image, versus distract from the image.

And, remember this is my vision. Your vision will be different, but you need to understand light and transparency characteristics.

Both statements are correct. Shadow areas are less of a distraction than blown highlights, even in large Ciba prints. And yes, understanding the restricted latitude of transparency is the foundation to achieving beautiful results with it. Practice, practice practice and the rewards will come.

The fountain is terrific.
I like the image of Amanda but I do think the daylight is too extreme and intrusive, even if illumination of the face (eyes) has been well considered. I saw an image recently of an African model posed artfully nude on a lounge by a venetian blind with sunlight coming in through its slots; result, a "zebra striped" black and white knockout. Mmmm.

nsouto · Oct 12, 2008

gr82bart said:
I read like Jacob Two Two and the Hooded Fang.

My preferred authors, anyway. No problem, got the meaning loud and clear.

benjiboy · Oct 14, 2008

I personally prefer to incidental light metering because it is in effect a highlight meter for exposing slide film, I find it give me a much higher percentage of correctly exposed slides, especially for shooting sequences of slides for projection, because they all have the same highlight density, and after calibrating your meter to suit the strength of your projector lamp, the screen images always appear regular so you don't go from a light slide to a darker one .

coigach · Oct 16, 2008

gr82bart said:
Here are two examples. In the fountain image, I exposed for the highlight, knowing that the fountain itself will be completely blacked out...

Going a bit off topic I know, just wanted to say the fountain picture is a cracker!

Cheers,
Gavin

Exposing for Slides

antonyg

Kevin Caulfield

Kevin Caulfield

frdrx

markbarendt

nemo999

keithwms

Poisson Du Jour

MattKing

Moderator

reellis67

nsouto

nsouto

Ira Rush

benjiboy

Doremus Scudder

timparkin

gr82bart

Attachments

markbarendt

23mjm

Poisson Du Jour

gr82bart

Poisson Du Jour

nsouto

benjiboy

coigach

Exposing for Slides

Moderator

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency