Any can work depending on your preferences.should i use, evaluative, partial or spot ?
See above; the main decision you need to make when metering is to determine where in the scene you need differentiation in tonal values and what is the film's capability of recording such differentiation. In general, negative film (color & B&W) can tolerate overexposure, but underexposure results in a lack of differentiation. Reversal/slide film (and digital) have the opposite behavior. Setting the ISO to a slower speed is sometimes done with negative film to systematically bias all exposures towards overexposure. To an extent, this can compensate for mistakes in metering, but personally, I'd rather focus on metering properly and shooting at box speed (if this is the effective speed of the film, which is certainly the case for Portra 400).Do i still have to meter for the shadows if my iso already @ 200 ?
You could do that and it's what I sometimes do when using an older camera that doesn't have a partial or spot metering, or a better-quality matrix metering pattern. I use Canon EOS cameras a lot and frankly never rely on their evaluative metering. If I were pressured to do so, I would do something like what you describe here, but I'd consider it a compromise.If so, and for argument sake, if I’m using evaluative do i just lower my camera eliminate much of the sky, take a reading then use that reading ?
Welcome aboard @artman51164 and congrats on the purchase of your Canon camera.
You ask a couple of interrelated questions about metering in general and the particular metering modes on your camera. If you haven't already, it might be a good idea to read one or several texts that cover the basics of how light meters work.
Any can work depending on your preferences.
Evaluative metering will make the camera decide on what it estimates to be a good exposure based on the input from its metering sensors and the algorithm embedded in the camera. It's essentially a black box. In my experience, Canon's evaluative metering especially from the era of the Canon 1n was reasonably good for average scenes, but would also be easily thrown off by bright or dark scenes or large contrasts. In this particular case, I would personally not rely on it, although since you already set the camera to overexpose by one stop (by setting it to ISO 200 instead of 400), this overall bright scene would likely record OK.
Partial and spot metering are essentially the same thing, just with a bigger (partial) or smaller (spot) metering area. In either case, you would point the meter at a part of the scene which you know where you'd want to place it exposure wise and then dial in the desired exposure compensation for that part. In this particular case (this film and this scene) I might have chosen spot metering, pointed at the supports underneath the building and dialed in something like -1.5 to -2.0 stops, since that's about the lowest bit in the film curve where I can expect decent differentiation. The rest of the scene is brighter and thus will record OK on color negative film. On slide film I would have metered on the brightest bit of the sky instead and put that on +2.0 or +2.5 stops overexposure to ensure it doesn't blow out and accept the shadows to fall where they may.
See above; the main decision you need to make when metering is to determine where in the scene you need differentiation in tonal values and what is the film's capability of recording such differentiation. In general, negative film (color & B&W) can tolerate overexposure, but underexposure results in a lack of differentiation. Reversal/slide film (and digital) have the opposite behavior. Setting the ISO to a slower speed is sometimes done with negative film to systematically bias all exposures towards overexposure. To an extent, this can compensate for mistakes in metering, but personally, I'd rather focus on metering properly and shooting at box speed (if this is the effective speed of the film, which is certainly the case for Portra 400).
You could do that and it's what I sometimes do when using an older camera that doesn't have a partial or spot metering, or a better-quality matrix metering pattern. I use Canon EOS cameras a lot and frankly never rely on their evaluative metering. If I were pressured to do so, I would do something like what you describe here, but I'd consider it a compromise.
You may realize as this thread develops, that personal tastes differ greatly, and there's no single 'best' way to do this. As always, what matter is that you find a way that works well for you. I feel that a good understanding of how a light meter works is essential in that; given such an understanding, you can use whichever method available to you to good effect.
Metering correctly by exposing for the shadows ?
U mentioned metering correctly when shooting using box speed. Metering correctly by exposing for the shadows ? Ex; the pier pic, meter the underside using spot then take the shot with that reading ?
Generally what is meant by "exposing for the shadows" is metering them and then exposing two to four stops less than that reading.
I’ve read to set iso to 200.
Generally what is meant by "exposing for the shadows" is metering them and then exposing two to four stops less than that reading.
Hmmm, doing it wrong then. I was metering then going of that and not less than the reading. Try it next time.
I.e. the pictorial evidence does not conform to the description. Btw, I agree with what @Chan Tran says here. The image does not seem to be overexposed, although it's hard to tell without having seen the negative. For what it's worth, I'd consider it more or less correctly exposed, perhaps leaning towards underexposure depending on how much differentiation in the shadow areas is desired in this case. That's entirely personal/subjective.Your post makes it looks like the film was overexposed but in my opinion it's not.
Generally what is meant by "exposing for the shadows" is metering them and then exposing two to four stops less than that reading.
One addition you seem to understand, but that often crops up and I want to clarify for people reading this thread in the future: "shadows" in this context aren't necessarily literal shadows, but dark parts of the scene, as opposed to highlights, light parts of a scene or image.Hmmm, doing it wrong then. I was metering then going of that and not less than the reading. Try it next time.
This is so true. I have been suprised more than once to see a lab make more-or-less acceptable prints from negatives that were not properly exposed and developed. They were not great prints, but the prints did not scream, "OMG, you have an exposure problem!"If you want to evaluate your exposure shooting negative film you have to know how to evaluate exposure by looking at the negative. Looking at the scans or prints is hard to tell. But with the OP post I must say it's not overexposed.
...to take a photo of the pier (golden hour) which metering mode on my camera should i use, evaluative, partial or spot ? ...and for argument sake, if I’m using evaluative do i just lower my camera eliminate much of the sky, take a reading then use that reading ? Or is there better way ? How would you approach it ?
This is 35mm film, right? It would be easy enough to take several shots using each metering method to see which one gives you the best results. Just keep good notes.
I find it educational to make notes about how I exposed every frame for the first few times I use a new camera or an unfamiliar film. When you get the negatives back, put them on a light table and look closely at the lightest areas (which will be shadows on the print) and see if there is detail (good exposure), or if the light areas are blank (underexposed). With 35mm film you may need a magnifying loupe to see what's going on.
? Which is why I suggested looking at the negatives and not the prints.The problem is as I said in the previous post if you bracket like say 3 shots with 1 stop interval you might get 3 almost identical prints. Worse yet it's possible none of the prints that you like. While it's possible looking only at the prints is very difficult to tell if the exposure was right.
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?