EXPOSING WITHOUT A METER FOR MENTAL SOLACE

[David Lyga]

There is something mentally exhilarating with taking a bare, meter-less camera and shooting correctly, knowing how to expose for the light that is there. To aid in this fantasy, I translate all shutter speeds and aperture settings into exposure values (EV) calling the combination thereof, simply a CEV. In other words, a given scene, in conjunction with a given film speed, requires, simply, a determined CEV, a single number. This elimination of a meter 'telling' me how to expose allows me to consider the camera an extension of my eye and brain.

Take a standard ISO 400 film: the exposure that I would give for an extremely sunny scene with shadow detail that is not predominant would be either a '17' or even '16' (if the shadow detail is really important). This is not the problem and the sunny f 16 rule comes to the mighty rescue (but my CEVs prevent having to use only f16). The real problems emanate from those overcast days where the determination of just how much light is coming forth becomes a bit more trying. I have learned that this amount of light can wreck mental havoc and the eye's need to assimilate and modify its response can add to the confusion. Is the scene a '12'? Is the scene a '10'? Is the scene a '14'? Indoors is a bit easier as 'artificial light' can be categorized into 'high', 'medium', 'low', 'dim', etc with surprising efficiency and accuracy.

Reflectance meters can be a problem if you are not fully aware that they want to see only medium gray and don't know that a particular scene does NOT want to be categorized as such. White people in light colored clothing against a light backdrop turns that meter into an obstacle. Black people in dark clothing against a dark backdrop turns that meter into an obstacle. Neither scenes are accurately portrayed as medium in tone. But the mind, equipped with knowledge about the light's intensity, can save the day in such situations.

Bottom line: am I being falsely optimistic or is it really possible to capture the intention of light with one's accumulated knowledge and experiences? How much freer I would feel without the meter as being part of my handicap. - David Lyga

 

[faberryman]

I am not sure why you feel free without a meter. A meter is no burden to me. Either way you have to think. But if shooting without a meter is mentally exhilarating to you, by all means enjoy yourself.

 

[abruzzi]

I find that my eyes and brain adapt so seamlessly to changing light that it can be really hard to guess. All my attempts are conditionals and rules based on a fixed point. Sunny 16 is the fixed point, mild cloud cover is two stops darker, heavy cloud cover is four stops darker (this is in New Mexico, other places heavy cloud cover may be heavier.)

That said, I do like shooting without a meter, it keeps me on my toes.

 

[David Lyga]

No is is not a burden, it is just that, somehow, I feel more liberated with 'owning' solely the camera. I posted this to see if I am alone with this 'malady' or if this triggers some similar feelings. Pure interest. - David Lyga

 

[phaedrus]

No is is not a burden, it is just that, somehow, I feel more liberated with 'owning' solely the camera. I posted this to see if I am alone with this 'malady' or if this triggers some similar feelings. Pure interest. - David Lyga

No, you‘re not alone. I do not totally forego the meter but enjoy keeping an eye on the light as it changes from a single measurement over time or going from light into shadow. Heightened awareness of the medium we paint with.

 

[AgX]

In other words, a given scene, in conjunction with a given film speed, requires, simply, a determined CEV, a single number.

This single number is just the EV.
To which then correponds a variety of shutter-speed/aperture combinations , what you call "CEV"

 

[Eric Rose]

My meter is just my backup to my brain. When shooting film I quite often don't bother too much with a meter. When shooting digital I just let the camera meter and I adjust the EV + or - since ISO can be constantly changing based on what I am doing.

May favourite cameras are one with no batteries.

 

[jim10219]

I've always used the way the shadows look to calculate Sunny 16. Hard shadows = 16. Soft shadows = 11. No shadows = 8.

I rarely go without a meter though. And usually if I do, I'm shooting an old 35mm camera just for fun. Like maybe I'll take a the Argus C3 out to a park with a roll in it and shoot some ducks.

My wife on the other hand doesn't use any tricks. She just somehow knows how to set the exposure. I've asked her how she does it, and she says she just looks at how bright the light is and uses her experience. Go figure. But it works for her. She doesn't even own a light meter AND doesn't know how to use sunny 16! Years of being a professional photographer, I guess (and it was all digital, though she always preferred manual modes for exposure and focus). Kind of like me and my weird pseudo perfect pitch thing. I can't tell you what note something is, but I can tell you what the "shape" of the chord was if you play a chord on a guitar. If you tune the guitar up or down a half step, I won't notice, but I do notice the subtle imperfections in the intonation of a guitar and they way they various notes within a chord relate to one another. I don't know how. It's just when I hear the chord, my brain visualizes what the hands are doing to make it. Years of experience, I guess.

 

[Vaughn]

Light under the redwoods I find to be too complex for guessing -- but I am always amazed at the consistency of light under the open sky.

So whatever floats your boat and helps your understanding of the light. I have always liked this chart on the back of my first Roleiflex...

Edited to add: By 'complex' I mean that under the same general lighting conditions, the deepest shadows I want detail in can vary by several stops from scene to scene, while the mid-tones and highlights stay about the same.

 

[Chan Tran]

This single number is just the EV.
To which then correponds a variety of shutter-speed/aperture combinations , what you call "CEV"

Yes the single number is EV which is the combination of shutter speed and aperture. However, the number must be modified for the same scene when using different film speed. So I use another number I call LV which is the EV at ISO 100. So in the case that David was using 17 for his ISO 400 It would be LV 15. So I would rate a scene in LV and then add or subtract for the ISO used.

 

[warden]

So whatever floats your boat and helps your understanding of the light. I have always liked this chart on the back of my first Roleiflex...

That is a cool chart. I like the lengthening shadows on the figures, which makes sense.

 

[Chan Tran]

I've always used the way the shadows look to calculate Sunny 16. Hard shadows = 16. Soft shadows = 11. No shadows = 8.

I rarely go without a meter though. And usually if I do, I'm shooting an old 35mm camera just for fun. Like maybe I'll take a the Argus C3 out to a park with a roll in it and shoot some ducks.

My wife on the other hand doesn't use any tricks. She just somehow knows how to set the exposure. I've asked her how she does it, and she says she just looks at how bright the light is and uses her experience. Go figure. But it works for her. She doesn't even own a light meter AND doesn't know how to use sunny 16! Years of being a professional photographer, I guess (and it was all digital, though she always preferred manual modes for exposure and focus). Kind of like me and my weird pseudo perfect pitch thing. I can't tell you what note something is, but I can tell you what the "shape" of the chord was if you play a chord on a guitar. If you tune the guitar up or down a half step, I won't notice, but I do notice the subtle imperfections in the intonation of a guitar and they way they various notes within a chord relate to one another. I don't know how. It's just when I hear the chord, my brain visualizes what the hands are doing to make it. Years of experience, I guess.

My brother who has perfect pitch which I know for sure but he also claims that he can see how bright things are.

 

[AgX]

Yes the single number is EV which is the combination of shutter speed and aperture. However, the number must be modified for the same scene when using different film speed. So I use another number I call LV which is the EV at ISO 100. So in the case that David was using 17 for his ISO 400 It would be LV 15. So I would rate a scene in LV and then add or subtract for the ISO used.

If not stated differently the EV is based on ISO 100, the same as with a GN.

(First time though I read of an LV (meaning an EV at other than ISO 100).)

 

[Chan Tran]

If not stated differently the EV is based on ISO 100, the same as with a GN.

(First time though I read of an LV (meaning an EV at other than ISO 100).)

I call it LV because EV has to have the ISO specified if you want to use it to indicate the light level of a scene. I don't know what term I should use but it's not EV because the EV is only shutter speed and aperture.

 

[AgX]

But if you just refer to a certain EV to describe a luminance situation, anyone who played a bit with meters should have an idea what situation you are talking about. As I said the standard for such talk is ISO 100.

With guidenumbers peoble neither make up different figures based on other film speeds when comparing flashes.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

At 7 bucks per 8x10, I cannot afford to work without a light metre... especially on those long road trips.

 

[BrianShaw]

I feel more free and exhilarating when shooting without underpants than shooting without a meter. But I do a lot of what you suggest, David. Take a couple of meter readings to understand the range of EV/LV and then shot, changing EV/LV according to need. It helps to be using a camera with a shutter that includes EV nomenclature ... for me that is a Hasselblad or Retina III. When shooting with a Nikon or LF I forgo the boxers and use the built-in meter.

 

[Vaughn]

At 7 bucks per 8x10, I cannot afford to work without a light metre... especially on those long road trips.

And when one needs to fine-tune LF negatives for alt processes, I find it important to have a solid grasp of the scene's brightness range. An average is not enough info.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

And when one needs to fine-tune LF negatives for alt processes, I find it important to have a solid grasp of the scene's brightness range. An average is not enough info.

Yes!

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Making reasonably exposed photos without a meter is no great feat. Modern films (1960 onwards) have sufficient latitude.

When I learned the Zone System, I began appreciating meters more.

However, when I first started making photos, ages 11 until 19, the only camera I had with exposure settings was an 8mm movie camera. No meter. The film was K II, fixed at ASA 25, the shutter speed was fixed at 1/30, so all I had to concentrate on was choosing an aperture, f/2.7 to f/22. I got very good at it.

When I got my SP500, the meter switch broke in the first week, so after I had that repaired I never wanted to use the meter again. For the next 15 years I used B&W films from ASA 100 to 400 and used my experience to choose shutter speed and aperture.

These days, using a camera without metering doesn't offer me any special Zen feeling; using the meter doesn't feel like cheating.

 

[logan2z]

I feel more free and exhilarating when shooting without underpants than shooting without a meter

I've learned to judge light reasonably well, but I still double check with a meter, even though I shoot negative film and it has sufficient latitude. I don't find it much of a hardship to carry a small Seikonic around in my pocket. Of course I might feel differently if I wasn't wearing underwear

 

[David Lyga]

I feared no responses; apparently, there is something valid to my post, pro or con, it does not matter. Thank you. - David Lyga

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am not sure why you feel free without a meter. A meter is no burden to me. Either way you have to think. But if shooting without a meter is mentally exhilarating to you, by all means enjoy yourself.

It is no burden for me to use a build in light meter and a spot meter. In fact it allows me to get the proper exposure in one shot, relieving me the need to bracketing every photograph with two exposures above and below Sunny 16. The saved cost of film alone to afford a Pentax Digital Spot Meter.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I do something similar with my Nikon D3100. It will accept pre-AI lenses albeit w/o any metering. I'll guess and verify with chimping and the histogram if I'm way off. Won't do it with important stuff but surprisingly I'm close enough to fix in post much of the time. Usually under by a stop or less. Allows me to use glass I'm fond of w/o machining the lens.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

It's hard to estimate exposure when the light is changing quickly such as during "magic hour". Even with a meter, I bracket. That gives me solace that I captured it right. The extra film is a cheap price to pay.