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.
ANSI PH3.49-19718 assumes that the lens has a flare factor of 1.03
And besides, its complete bollocks with regard to how a meter manufacturer gets the exposure into the middle of te film curve.
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.
Sekonic L558/758 does offset with a menu, separate from film speed if I recall correctly. All one needs is the right meter!So you want another dial on the meter so that you can leave the ISO setting alone?
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.
Sekonic L558/758 does offset with a menu, separate from film speed if I recall correctly. All one needs is the right meter!
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.
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?
Ditto.Exactly.
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.
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!!
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?