Feedback Please: The Kodak 18% Grey Card and Metering, a new look.

IMG_7114w.jpg

D
IMG_7114w.jpg

  • 2
  • 0
  • 48
Cycling with wife #1

D
Cycling with wife #1

  • 0
  • 0
  • 43
Papilio glaucus

D
Papilio glaucus

  • 2
  • 0
  • 33
The Bee keeper

A
The Bee keeper

  • 1
  • 4
  • 159
120 Phoenix Red?

A
120 Phoenix Red?

  • 8
  • 4
  • 163

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,187
Messages
2,770,784
Members
99,573
Latest member
A nother Kodaker
Recent bookmarks
0

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,763
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm
OK Now I finally see what you mean.
I was considering the "straight" part of the curve as a different segment.
I found this source:
Dead Link Removed

It shows how "middle grey" is at density 1 if we "cut" the linear part the way he does (using a part of the toe as well).

The exposure value is also "0" in both cases. So the center of the graphs should be 0, 1.0 in both cases.

Is there a specific reason for it, or is it just a coincidence?

The ISO-ANSI standard, if I get it right, calculates sensitivity by measuring a certain given value of density above base+fog.

I know that Minolta and Pentax meters are calibrated with a K14 and Sekonic meters are calibrated with a K12.5. Taking a K14 meter and measure an area on the subject. If you would then set the camera as per the meter indicates then the exposure at the film plane is
0.11 lux.sec for ISO100 if the lens is perfect and focus at infinity.
ANSI PH3.49-19718 assumes that the lens has a flare factor of 1.03, lens transmittance factor of 0.90, lens vignetting factor of 1.0, the subject is 12 degrees from lens axis and the subject distance is 80 times the focal length. With that factor in the exposure at the film plane for ISO100 is 0.099 lux.sec.
Since the X axis of the graph is log of exposure so the two values are -0.96 and -1.04. The author place the 0 at -1.00 which is reasonable. For ISO 400 this 0 point is -1.60 and this is where the author place the 0 at. So to him the 0 is the exposure as per the meter reading.
Using a K12.5 it only shifts this point to the left by 0.05.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
2,608
Location
Los Angeles
Format
4x5 Format
Values of K other than 12.5 are most likely attributed to two factors: spectral sensitivity of the photo cell and lens transmittance. This is the K equation:
K equation.jpg


From Appendix C3 Spectral Considerations

The spectral response of the film and the detector as well as the spectral quality of the light in the scene, and the light used in calibration and sensitometry, affect the meter calibration. If one factor (r) is chosen to relate the photocell’s spectral response to the scene as compared to that calibration, and a second factor (p) is used to relate the film’s spectral response between scene and the sensitometric evaluations, these factors can be combined with (R) into the constant K1 of equation C4. (Eq C4 Hg = K1/Sx). These factors are defined as follows:

Firstly, r = ratio of luminance of uniform surface source used in calibration to luminance of scene when both sources produce the same response of the meter.

Since the calibration color temperature of 4700K was chosen to minimize the spectral effect indicated luminance in daylight compared to the indicated luminance for tungsten, the spectral response ratio determined between 4700K and 2850K is a reasonable measure of the effect of difference in spectral sensitivity between daylight and the 4700K calibration sources.

Secondly, p=ratio of the photographic effectiveness (actinity) of scene luminance to the photographic effectiveness of illuminance used in determining film speed.

It is now possible to define a basic constant K1 which excludes all variables except film speed Sx and camera exposure Hg due to measured field luminance. K`1 is defined as the value of K1 when:

r = 1.0
p = 1.0
R = 1.0

Equation C4 may be modified by substituting the above parameters to obtain:

Hg = (K`1 * r) / (p*Sx*R)

Appendix C5 Assumed Values (excerpt)

Since r and t are subject to change, it is desirable to establish a constant Ko which is not likely to be changed greatly as the above variables change. Therefore, K is defined as follows:

K = (Ko * r) / t

--------------------------
According to Re-evaluation of Factors Affecting Manual or Automatic Control of Camera Exposure, this equation provides “a better foundation for establishing different values of the constant K used to calibrate meters under a wide variety of applications. In particular, the loss in transmission due to the many elements in a zoom lens, and the effects of highly red or blue sensitive detectors are taken into account.”

A value of 14 for K means the Ev will be a touch lower and the exposure calculator will have a slightly slower shutter speed or lower f/stop than it would for a value of 12.5 in at least one of the two situations. A K of 14 could easily mean the manufacturer has concluding that zoom lenses are more prevalent and with the additional elements has a lower transmittance than the ~ 0.90 of the standards. The additional exposure will make up for this optical system light loss and place the exposure at Hg. A lens with fewer elements might have higher transmission properties causing the exposure to be slightly higher than required.

(11.4 * 1) / .81 = 14.1

Meter spectral response - 1.jpg


If the value of 14 comes from the photo cell being more sensitive to the color temperature of the calibrating light source, the meter will read the calibrated value for L as higher than it is. A value of K will mathematically reduce it and the exposure calculator should then produce the same exposure recommendation as with K = 12.5. I have to admit this part is just speculation as I’ve not read anything about this specifically nor am I privy to any manufacturer insider information.

(11.4 * 1.1) / .90 = 13.9

One of the reasons why the 18% question continues to persist is that it really isn’t that relevant. Whatever the meter is pointed at, it wants to place it on the same exposure point (log-H) for a given film speed. The f/Stop and shutter speed will probably be slightly different with the different value of K, but the exposure is always supposed to fall at the same point. If the difference in K is from the spectral sensitivity of the photo cell at 4700k, K is compensating for a reading that is either higher or lower than the target value. If the different K comes from the value of t, it may or may not represent the lens you are using, but the exposure difference is small.
 
Last edited:
  • RobC
  • Deleted
  • Reason: personal attacks

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
And besides, its complete bollocks with regard to how a meter manufacturer gets the exposure into the middle of te film curve.

Why the fixation on the middle?
 
OP
OP

RobC

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
3,880
Location
UK
Format
Multi Format
Its towards the middle but is dependant on the film and your dev and the non constant of K which vairies according to manufacturer so it can't possibly be a mathematical constant can it. And that means its a variable at the whim of the meter manufactruer.
Be a bloody good thing if we could set the K factor we want to use in our meter and not be stuck with with just one value. So then we'd have our own calibration adjustment factor.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,462
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
"Factor" might have been a better word to use than "constant",eh?

But how much practical difference do you think it would make to be able to adjust the K-factor? In stops, please.

Some meters easily allow offset of the meter calculations, and all allow you to do it manually. doesn't that basically do the function you desire?
 
OP
OP

RobC

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
3,880
Location
UK
Format
Multi Format
Yes it does if you know how. But if you don't, which it seems an awful lot of people don't, then having to set it for your film type/dev combo would alert a lot of people to the possibility and maybe how to calculate it for themselves.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,462
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
But how much does it matter, in stops?

And I think if someone doesn't know how to is set their meter exposure calculator, it will only be more complex trying to adjust the meters calibration factor. That only seems useful to calibrate across different meters. I tend to use one or two meters (and have for the past 25+ years) so having difficulty understanding the practicality of both the oroblem and proposed solutions.

I'm eagerly awaiting draft2 in hopes I'll learn something new.
 

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
Its towards the middle but is dependant on the film and your dev and the non constant of K which vairies according to manufacturer so it can't possibly be a mathematical constant can it. And that means its a variable at the whim of the meter manufactruer.
Be a bloody good thing if we could set the K factor we want to use in our meter and not be stuck with with just one value. So then we'd have our own calibration adjustment factor.

So you want another dial on the meter so that you can leave the ISO setting alone?
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,462
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
So you want another dial on the meter so that you can leave the ISO setting alone?
Sekonic L558/758 does offset with a menu, separate from film speed if I recall correctly. All one needs is the right meter!
 

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
But how much does it matter, in stops?

And I think if someone doesn't know how to is set their meter exposure calculator, it will only be more complex trying to adjust the meters calibration factor. That only seems useful to calibrate across different meters. I tend to use one or two meters (and have for the past 25+ years) so having difficulty understanding the practicality of both the oroblem and proposed solutions.

I'm eagerly awaiting draft2 in hopes I'll learn something new.

Not trying to answer for Rob here.

It does seem to me that film manufacturers have (at least to a point) done the calculation for us and given us a practical way to center up the gray card in the scene. They seem to give us EI numbers to match different curves that would center up the gray card.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,462
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Well that's what I'm struggling with... The practical implications in words a mere mortal can understand. I understand the concepts discussed but struggle with the details of the math, mostly from disinterest though. I'm a smart guy but not exactly a rocket scientist, and been photographing for personal "artistic" pursuits and engineering data collection since 1982. These considerations have been a curiosity but never a significant consideration.
 

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
Sekonic L558/758 does offset with a menu, separate from film speed if I recall correctly. All one needs is the right meter!

Interesting, seems a bit fiddly to me, but to each their own.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,462
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
I think the intent is for filter factors, but with adjustability to 1/10 stop it seems too fiddley to me too! But maybe just what the perfectionist could use to do what they need.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
19,746
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Well that's what I'm struggling with... The practical implications in words a mere mortal can understand. I understand the concepts discussed but struggle with the details of the math, mostly from disinterest though. I'm a smart guy but not exactly a rocket scientist, and been photographing for personal "artistic" pursuits and engineering data collection since 1982. These considerations have been a curiosity but never a significant consideration.

I think you have summed up very well the kind of person I think Rob's article is aimed at.

pentaxuser
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
2,608
Location
Los Angeles
Format
4x5 Format
For B&W negative film, the metered exposure falls 1.0 log-H above speed point. The example is for 125 speed.

Speed Point - Standard Model.jpg


According to the standard, "In order for a meter to be used to set a camera to the proper exposure, the following relationship is assumed to exist."

BTW, the standard uses the term "constant."
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,462
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
So here's an ignorant question: what's the difference between fretting over K and the internal engineering of meters and standards... and figuring out a "personal EI" to get the exact exposure one wants?
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
2,608
Location
Los Angeles
Format
4x5 Format
So here's an ignorant question: what's the difference between fretting over K and the internal engineering of meters and standards... and figuring out a "personal EI" to get the exact exposure one wants?

Why figure out a personal EI when you can simply go out and shoot?
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,462
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Ditto.

But I'm honestly trying to understand the magnitude of the problem being addressed and the practical impacts. I use box speed, "standard processing " and have no complaints. I've used, in the past, a gray card both correctly and incorrectly and never had what I'd call a noticeable error or photographic failure.

I completely understand Robs annoyance at incorrect use of a gray card. Some folks just don't read and follow instructions. Some folks repeat the wrong instructions too. But my quick literature review showed that to be a minority situation. And my measurements show about .5 stop impact. So why fret over 18% vs 12%, K constants, etc etc etc when the goal seems to be correcting the improper procedure used by some people. I get that. I don't get all of the rest except for the intellectual curiosity factor because the practical impact seem to be in the noise.
 
Last edited:

Old-N-Feeble

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
6,805
Location
South Texas
Format
Multi Format
All this complicated stuff about something so simple as "expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights. What "middle value"? There is no middle value. There are darker values that need at least a certain amount of exposure to record them. There are brighter values that development must be adjusted to place them where you want them.

But, OMG!!, I'll be better of with a spot meter then.

YUP!! :D
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,763
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm
I think the intent is for filter factors, but with adjustability to 1/10 stop it seems too fiddley to me too! But maybe just what the perfectionist could use to do what they need.

Well in the other thread RobC is talking about meters that has accuracy of 0.0285 stop and repeatability of 0.00288 stop. Very interesting meter. I wish I can have one.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,462
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
For scientific work I understand that. I've used photo meters and spectrophotometers for that application. For everything else...
 

Diapositivo

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
3,257
Location
Rome, Italy
Format
35mm
All this complicated stuff about something so simple as "expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights. What "middle value"? There is no middle value. There are darker values that need at least a certain amount of exposure to record them. There are brighter values that development must be adjusted to place them where you want them.

But, OMG!!, I'll be better of with a spot meter then.

YUP!! :D

I don't agree with that.
This is the point of view of somebody using negatives, developing them personally, printing them personally, and being also quite sophisticade about it so that it controls the results of each single stage according to a certain expected result.

The vast majority of humanity buys (or used to buy) film, had it developed by a commercial laboratory, and printed by the same commercial laboratory. The vast majority of humanity never thought in terms of exposing for shadows and developing for highlights.
Hundreds of millions of customers of film manufacturers relied on a "speed" indication and wanted to obtain let's say good slides after setting the light meter for that speed indication. And they did get the result they wanted.
That's because the speed indication does, indeed, give you a reliable exposure value for the middle grey of the scene or, if your prefer, for the middle tone of the average, common, scene which coincides with the middle grey of the human eye.

I understand that, formally, ISO speed is not defined taking "middle grey" as the reference point, but the final result was, is, and must necessarily be, that the middle grey on film (given industry standard development and printing) is perceived as a pretty close exact match of the middle grey of the scene, given an exposure for that speed.

ISO speed is a number to match middle grey of scene to middle grey of film for 99% of photographer of this planet.

You guys are too technical in this forum ;-) and forget that real world must be based on simple concepts that must work for aunt Sue when she goes on holidays with her camera and slide film.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom