Incident light meters question

Barbara

A
Barbara

  • 1
  • 0
  • 59
The nights are dark and empty

A
The nights are dark and empty

  • 9
  • 5
  • 112
Nymphaea's, triple exposure

H
Nymphaea's, triple exposure

  • 0
  • 0
  • 56
Nymphaea

H
Nymphaea

  • 1
  • 0
  • 46

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,926
Messages
2,783,222
Members
99,747
Latest member
Richard Lawson
Recent bookmarks
0

Q.G.

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
5,535
Location
Netherlands
Format
Medium Format
[...] What doesn't makes sense to me is that you could take a reading in sunshine and there would be any change in the highlights. [...]

"Meter the bit lit by the strongest light, and the error will indeed be in the shadows."
 

Q.G.

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
5,535
Location
Netherlands
Format
Medium Format
I don't think so. It's pretty basic stuff. [...]
Like I said, pretty basic stuff.

It indeed is.
It shows how you need to make decisions how to use a meter to get the result you want.

What i too think is misleading is the repeated assertion that it is an incident light metering thing.
It is not. :wink:
 

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
I don't think so. It's pretty basic stuff. Now I have done this and verified for myself with my incident meter and it is true. What I have been saying is simply fact----basic incident metering facts.

Thank you for the pictures and explanation, with a bit of luck we can get on the same page now.

Every meter/metering method has it's limits and strengths. The user needs to learn when each tool is appropriate and how to use each or adapt the tool they have to the situation.

Essentially what you have shown in your pictures is how to use an incident meter as a spot meter, as you have demonstrated it can do an excellent job of spot metering too.

So let's break this down a bit.

The first decision any photographer has to make is, "what is the subject?" Without defining the subject we don't know know what tool is most appropriate.

If the subject is the door, AND both the highlight and shadow details are equally important in the scene, a spot meter (or incident meter used as a spot meter) is the hard way to do this; any meter that will average the whole scene will get the camera very close to the proper exposure in the scene you chose. My old FM2n with a normal lens nails shots like this every time.

The next question is "does my medium have enough range to get all the detail I want?" Well that depends on just how far you want to see into the shadows/highlights. A film like Velvia would not go too deep, TMY shot at a tested and proven personal EI and developed specifically for the scene brightness range will get you bunches.

Let's consider a slightly different subject, say "Alan Ross" in picture 2, the incident meter was used to measure the same light Alan was in, shade here.

The incident meter will not be fooled by the other lighting in the scene.

Alan is perfectly exposed. Sure, the highlights are way out there on the edge, but so what. If we choose Alan as the subject, regardless of meter or method, the camera can only shoot one setting at a time and the rest of the scene simply "falls" where it "falls".

If you want both Alan and the door with detail in both shadow and highlight you will probably have to change the lighting Alan is in.
 

Chuck_P

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
2,369
Location
Kentucky
Format
4x5 Format
It indeed is.
It shows how you need to make decisions how to use a meter to get the result you want.

This the essence of what I have been trying to contribute in this thread to the OP. The OP states:

"I am in a position where I need a meter to use with an unmetered camera and it seems that most affordable hand held meters are incident meters. So, what does the reading tell you? Does it simply tell you what exposure is needed for a middle gray based on the falling light?

Several posts answered his question, but I feel they did not adequately describe the pitfalls of incident metering.

What i too think is misleading is the repeated assertion that it is an incident light metering thing.
It is not. :wink:

I'm sorry, I guess I am just dense enough to not grasp what you mean by this. I apologise for that, but it's not important enough to drag this thread out any further. I hope the OP feels he's gotten some good info from all.

Chuck
 
OP
OP

jmal

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
529
Location
Kansas
Format
35mm
CPorter--Thanks. It took a while to get around to it, but you have explained and, more importantly, demonstrated what I was after. Thanks all or the discussion. It has been revealing.

This the essence of what I have been trying to contribute in this thread to the OP. The OP states:

"I am in a position where I need a meter to use with an unmetered camera and it seems that most affordable hand held meters are incident meters. So, what does the reading tell you? Does it simply tell you what exposure is needed for a middle gray based on the falling light?

Several posts answered his question, but I feel they did not adequately describe the pitfalls of incident metering.



I'm sorry, I guess I am just dense enough to not grasp what you mean by this. I apologise for that, but it's not important enough to drag this thread out any further. I hope the OP feels he's gotten some good info from all.

Chuck
 

Brandon D.

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2008
Messages
210
Location
USA
Format
Medium Format
I'm sorry, I guess I am just dense enough to not grasp what you mean by this. I apologise for that, but it's not important enough to drag this thread out any further.

What he means is that exposure "problems" with high contrast scenes can't be blamed on the [incident] meter itself.

Take, for instance, the example of Alan at the door. It's not a "metering thing" because it's the photographer's decision making process and technique that should be making decisions about the overall exposure for the scene (not the meter itself).
 

Zachary9

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
1
Format
Multi Format
A light meter, or exposure meter, is a device used to measure the amount of light in an environment. Light meters are most commonly used by photographers.
 

Theo43

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
44
Location
Ontario, Can
Format
Medium Format
CPorter,
The images you posted (#71) speak volumes; with your permission I would copy and save these on my computer for future reference.
Ted
 

Chuck_P

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
2,369
Location
Kentucky
Format
4x5 Format
CPorter,
The images you posted (#71) speak volumes; with your permission I would copy and save these on my computer for future reference.
Ted

They're not mine, I just used them to illustrate the point.

I probably should have mentioned where that series of pictures came from, they are from John P. Schafer's book: The Ansel Adams Guide, Basic Techniques of Photography, Book 1.
 

Q.G.

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
5,535
Location
Netherlands
Format
Medium Format
A light meter, or exposure meter, is a device used to measure the amount of light in an environment. Light meters are most commonly used by photographers.

Very true.

The next questions to be answered are "How?", and "How to best effect?"
 

mark

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2003
Messages
5,703
Thanks that looks interesting
 

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,970
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
2F/2F is working his way around the backlighting objection by saying (rather obliquely) that the light source isn't the backlight anymore in that situation, but the light source is whatever is causing fill on the side away from the backlight. This is a rather awkward and confusing way to state the case, especially when read by a beginning photographer. 2F/2F is also recommending a method for the studio which is more often used to determine lighting ratios, and is rather more suited to a flat incident plate rather than a hemispherical dome receptor on the meter.

I have seen one book that recommends splitting the difference between two readings in a sidelit situation, one reading aimed at the camera and one at the light source. All others I've seen, including meter instructions from Gossen, Minolta, Sekonic, and from Ansel Adams, Phil Davis (his Incident Reading Zone System), and many others indicate that the hemisphere should be in the same light as the subject, pointed in the direction from the subject to the camera.

In the end, a hemispherical receptor incident meter is specifically designed to be used in the same light as the subject, pointed in the same direction as from the subject to the camera. The reason for the hemispherical dome is to get a decent reading of the the light falling on a 3D subject that will be reflected toward the camera. As you gain experience, you might decide to finesse that reading a bit, but it's the place to start, and to stay until you become smarter than your meter.

I never saw anyone in the dozens of studios I worked in use a hemispherical incident dome pointed directly at the light source as a final exposure reading unless the light source was in line with the camera or they were trying to underexpose the shadow side of an object. The meter was pointed with the dome toward the camera.

Lee
I've used the Duplex method of incidental metering for many years where you point the meter at the main light (or the Sun outdoors) and then from the subject to the camera in the normal way and set the lens at half way between the two readings to average them, I've been using this method since I read it in Dunn and Wakefield s book "Exposure Manual" way back in the 1950s both with slides and neg film and it's practically infallible in any light, front, ,back or sidelight. Try it it works :smile:
 

Lee L

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
3,281
Format
Multi Format
I've used the Duplex method of incidental metering for many years where you point the meter at the main light (or the Sun outdoors) and then from the subject to the camera in the normal way and set the lens at half way between the two readings to average them, I've been using this method since I read it in Dunn and Wakefield s book "Exposure Manual" way back in the 1950s both with slides and neg film and it's practically infallible in any light, front, ,back or sidelight. Try it it works :smile:
Not in all cases. I've been using incident and reflected light meters for over 40 years, and I've used the duplex incident method. I'd never use duplex incident for a directly backlit very dark-skinned soccer player facing me in the harsh midday sun. Turning my back to the sun, hunching over the meter and taking a reading with the meter at my chest, pointed away from the sun (same as "from subject toward camera" orientation) works perfectly for that.

I have used duplex incident for a backlit white flower with thin petals and slide film. It works well for that, keeping the backlit white petals just within the dynamic range of the slide film.

But the quoted post of mine was about advice to beginners on standard incident meter use, not about advanced use in special circumstances. I'd still maintain that standard incident method is sufficiently accurate that the duplex method isn't often warranted, especially with current negative films. I'd also maintain that I'd lose shadow detail at my tested film speeds under many circumstances with the duplex method. But then you and I might have different preferences where shadow detail is concerned. All in all, I'd prefer Phil Davis' methods to duplex incident readings.

Lee
 

Galah

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
479
Location
Oz
Format
Multi Format
Where i find things tricky is when the subject is partially in shade, partially in the light. With an incident meter only what do you in this case?

You need do nothing at all: the incident reading the meter gives you should automatically render highlights as highlights and shadows as shadows (on the negative). :smile:

The only problem that could arise is that the subject brightness range exceeds the exposure latitude of the film. Therefore, in theory, you could end up with blown highlights as well as blocked shadows, both in the same shot.:tongue:
 

Galah

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
479
Location
Oz
Format
Multi Format
I disagree. The way I was trained, it works from the subject pointed toward the light. You point the meter at the main light source that is illuminating the part of the composition for which you would like to expose. This is not always at the camera. Where the camera is has no effect on what light is falling on the subject. In the studio, you point the meter at the main light from where the subject is. You then measure the other lights and other areas of the composition in relation to the main light to find the lighting ratios/relationships, and hence figure out what your picture will look like. Outside on a clear day, when the sun is directly illuminating the entire composition, you point your meter at the sun. In a scene in which indirect (reflected or diffused) light is providing the illumination (backlit, overcast/hazy, shade, etc.), then you just hold the meter where the subject is, perpendicular to the ground. (This is the "at the camera" method.) The whole point of incident meters is to measure the light coming from the light source and hitting the subject, not the light coming from the camera, so point it at the light source. While the "at the camera" method will work fine in many situations (specifically, those in which the main light source is effectively coming from the same direction as the camera), it is really just a rule of thumb, and does not make one understand what they are doing by measuring incident light, and in the studio, does not give one control over lighting ratios.


Read the pamphlet that comes with the meter: it will tell you clearly to point at the camera from the subject's position (or proxy).

The whole point of the "dome" or "invercone" is that it is designed to average the light falling on the subject so as to take into account the lit and the shaded sides from whatever (all and any) sources in order to provide a mid-range (medium grey) reading for the whole subject.
To point at this light and that and then compute averages is simply to attempt to do ("by hand") what the meter is already designed to do automatically.

This would be like using a chainsaw as if it were a handsaw: moving it back and forth, when it is designed to eliminate all that effort.:tongue:
 

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
Galah

The point of using any non standard angle is artistic, the pamphlet is the beginners guide.

Technically, changing the head's angle in space is about changing the bias of what's important; front to back or right to left. How much shadow or bright do I want?

Turning the head is about mood and emotion, it is elegant and fast when it a well practiced because there is no extra math.

This technique is also used in conjunction with other things like fill flash.

Using the pamphlets instructions gets you standard looking photos, is that what we are really after?
 

Rudeofus

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
5,081
Location
EU
Format
Medium Format
account the lit and the shaded sides from whatever (all and any) sources in order to provide a mid-range (medium grey) reading for the whole subject.
To make this statement a little more precise: The dome on an incident light meter copies the bahavior of a diffuse reflector. Any point of your (diffusely reflecting) motive gets lit from the half space around it on the exterior and reflects all that light into that same half space, which also includes your camera lens. The result: a diffuse reflector is rendered medium gray in your pic if and only if it was indeed medium gray.

That's the beauty of an incident light meter: dark motives are rendered dark, and bright motives are rendered bright, and all this works without any correction.
 

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,970
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
Not in all cases. I've been using incident and reflected light meters for over 40 years, and I've used the duplex incident method. I'd never use duplex incident for a directly backlit very dark-skinned soccer player facing me in the harsh midday sun. Turning my back to the sun, hunching over the meter and taking a reading with the meter at my chest, pointed away from the sun (same as "from subject toward camera" orientation) works perfectly for that.

I have used duplex incident for a backlit white flower with thin petals and slide film. It works well for that, keeping the backlit white petals just within the dynamic range of the slide film.

But the quoted post of mine was about advice to beginners on standard incident meter use, not about advanced use in special circumstances. I'd still maintain that standard incident method is sufficiently accurate that the duplex method isn't often warranted, especially with current negative films. I'd also maintain that I'd lose shadow detail at my tested film speeds under many circumstances with the duplex method. But then you and I might have different preferences where shadow detail is concerned. All in all, I'd prefer Phil Davis' methods to duplex incident readings.

Lee
I agree with most of what you write Lee, I only tend to use the use the Duplex method in back lighting with a late model Weston light meter and the invercone which was the method that Dunn and Wakefield devised the method with because the invercone is unique in that it's bigger than the meter body and allows the light to back leak, but for most circumstances a straight incidental reading pointing the dome from the subject towards the camera with any meter I find produces a very high proportion of correct exposures except with the examples you quote when the needs adjusting to compensate for it's none standard nature by a half to one stop up or down depending on if the subject is exceptionally light or dark.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
226
Location
Bilthoven, T
Format
4x5 Format
2F/2F;912911 If I had to use only one meter said:
Absolutely right. The incident meter measures the intensity of the incident light, and therefore the intensity of the diffuse reflected light from a highlight (or the 100% reflected diffuse highlight). With constant development procedures, it will give you a consistent density for the highlights. In other words: it is an absolute measurement and it will give you consistent negative quality. The reference point is therefore at the high lights. But it is simply linked to middle gray, because the difference is 2,3 stops.
I use a spotmeter as well, but for analysis purposes only. Not for setting the exposure values.

Jed
 

Galah

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
479
Location
Oz
Format
Multi Format
This is a great thread on the subject and an excellent review of the topic. Thanks to the OP for posting it, and to all who contributed.

Something like this, every now and again, is great "revison".:smile:
 

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,970
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
Absolutely right. The incident meter measures the intensity of the incident light, and therefore the intensity of the diffuse reflected light from a highlight (or the 100% reflected diffuse highlight). With constant development procedures, it will give you a consistent density for the highlights. In other words: it is an absolute measurement and it will give you consistent negative quality. The reference point is therefore at the high lights. But it is simply linked to middle gray, because the difference is 2,3 stops.
I use a spotmeter as well, but for analysis purposes only. Not for setting the exposure values.

Jed
I agree Jed, Incidental is magic, I find since I shoot a lot of slide film in 35mm and 120 for projection incidental metering gives them all the same density, so that you don't go from a very dark image to a very bright one on the screen which can be very disconcerting for the viewer.
 

canlyhanson

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2010
Messages
1
Format
35mm
I too used to meter the palm of my hand with a Weston before I found a dome for it. Worked fine as long as I remembered to take my glove off... It is also useful to have a white card around for low light conditions.
 

wclark5179

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
504
Format
35mm RF
Wow!

All this discussion. It's interesting. When I first got bit by the photography bug, way way back in the 1950's (Did the sun shine back then?), I didn't have the moola to buy a light meter. Many folks I knew back then operated the same way. Kodak film had a neat tidy little instruction sheet, printed on white paper that came tucked in the yellow box that held the film. The instructions had suggestions for settings under various lighting conditions. Then I hit the big time and bought a light meter. Just for grins I would eyeball each situation over then check with my trusty light meter and by gosh by golly I was usually pretty dog gone close. Today people sure like those photos I made about 50 years ago!

For wedding gigs I don't hardly ever use a light meter. Maybe this old fart has done enough gigs to have some intuitive insights as to where this technical piece should be. I run my cameras in manual and the flashes mostly off-camera in manual when I use flashes. I have also used a hybrid system where I run the main at 1/2 power in manual mode and the fill at -2 elevated a wee bit on a custom bracket that I use in ETTL. For large groups I reverse the role of the flashes, the main becomes the fill and the fill becomes the main. And now on the other side I've got that lovely beautiful graph called the histogram that does give some information. And I also shoot in RAW. Smiles & Fun!

How about light patterns & ratios?

Why, if you're really out to "get it right" why not bracket and use more film so these film mfgrs can keep producing?

Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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