Incident vs Reflected light in sun

[BrianShaw]

Incorrect.

Correct

 

[foc]

It’s either a full moon or April Fool’s Day around here today!

I think some people like to "stir it up" regardless of the lunar cycle.

OR.............................

 

[guangong]

Usually I use reflected meters for general photography, but incident meter when shooting movies. Reflected meter ( or cardboard calculator) because most of my small film shooting is rather spontaneous, and also because shots can be adjusted and printed individually.
I use incident meters when shooting movies, because not just within a given roll, but to maintain consistency with other rolls. Unlike still photography, processing of movies film is more standardized, and differences in exposure can be disturbing to viewer.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

OK Guys I think you're piling on. We all make mistakes.

 

[BrianShaw]

OK Guys I think you're piling on. We all make mistakes.

Sure… we all do. And most of us figure out when we are wrong, accept responsibility for the error, and apologize. It’s a much better tactic than confusing someone who asked a sincere question that has a rather basic answer.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Don't beat a dead horse.

 

[BrianShaw]

Don't beat a dead horse.

So how do you meter a scene, dead horse or other scene, with an incident light meter?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

It's not necessary to embarrass other forum posters. That's why so many people leave these forums. Because it gets personal and insulting. It's not necessary. The point was made as was the correct answer numerous times. Let's move on.

 

[BrianShaw]

People also leave when they get bad information. Lol.

 

[Mike Lopez]

Sure… we all do. And most of us figure out when we are wrong, accept responsibility for the error, and apologize. It’s a much better tactic than confusing someone who asked a sincere question that has a rather basic answer.

Yeah but this would require a degree of maturity and self-awareness that is way too uncommon on message boards.

 

[Zathras]

So how do you meter a scene, dead horse or other scene, with an incident light meter?

Easy, walk up to the dead horse, whip out yer incident meter, point the dome toward yer camera and take a reading.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Don't beat a dead horse.

Agreed. This thread should have died a while ago, and adding to it in no way helps the OP.

 

[CMoore]

People also leave when they get bad information. Lol.

I am all for people using equipment in a "Non Traditional" manner.....thinking outside the box, as it were.
But i was not aware that the companies, that manufacture meters, ever suggested that the Incident Meter be placed at the camera and pointed at the subject.
I cannot remember which of our members typed that, but it struck me as odd.
I only have one handheld meter, but the instructions definitely Do NOT say to point the dome at the subject, from the camera.

I guess it was here.
Like i say, i only have ONE meter, so others might instruct to use their meter in a different way.?


Sirius Glass Subscriber Ads Enabled
Messages:
35,192
Joined:
Jan 18, 2007
Location:
Southern California
Shooter:
Multi Format
Groups:

• Graphics et al
• Hasselblad
• Optical Printing
• Pyro Developers

wiltw said: ↑
This comment is NOT how you use an incident meter!!!

With incident meter, point the dome toward the lens ideally with meter at subject position, take the reading. If impossible to be where the subject is, you can stand in the direction of the subject and aim at the lens but the assumption is the light is identical there as it is at the subject (which sometimes is not a valid assumption!)

If using a reflected light meter, you aim it from camera position toward the subject.
Click to expand...

No, never. PERIOD! The dome is aimed toward the subject from the position of the camera; that is the dome points the same way the lens does, not towards the lens. The concept is to get the same light as the subject. Take a look at the manuals, they are all consistent.

 

[BrianShaw]

To the best of my knowledge…

The closest documented alternative to “normal use of an incident light meter” you can get is by going back to Dunn, in the 1950’s, who promoted “Duplex metering”… and that was pointing incident meter FROM THE SUBJECT POSITION at the light/shadow sources to allow an average to be computed.

 

[grain elevator]

Can we make this thread a sticky please? Very useful to learn which forum members' information not to trust.

 

[Arthurwg]

Can we make this thread a sticky please? Very useful to learn which forum members' information not to trust.

Don't be ridiculous. No need to imbed wrong information. Everyone makes mistakes. This forum member is one of the most active and most valuable. We need him.

 

[Mike Lopez]

Don't be ridiculous. No need to imbed wrong information. Everyone makes mistakes. This forum member is one of the most active and most valuable. We need him.

"This forum member" is also one of the most arrogant you'll ever find anywhere--just look at how confident he was while screaming bad information into the thread. Speak for yourself on needing him.

 

[wiltw]

No, never. PERIOD! The dome is aimed toward the subject from the position of the camera; that is the dome points the same way the lens does, not towards the lens. The concept is to get the same light as the subject. Take a look at the manuals, they are all consistent.

You are going to make that statement in spite of the fact that in post #42 I directly copied both the user instructions from Sekonic, and from Minolta, about using their incident meters?!

"lumisphere aimed in the camera direction"​

...and Figure 1 of the Minolta manual clearly shows the hemisphere at the subject, pointed in the direction of the lens?!

 

[MattKing]

wiltw:
It appears to me that you are quoting CMoore's rather awkward attempt to respond and disagree with Sirius' "No, never. PERIOD" comment.
He wasn't adopting it, he was disagreeing with it.
Everyone:
The comment in question has been refuted in many effective ways. There is no need to add more.

 

[wiltw]

wiltw:
It appears to me that you are quoting CMoore's rather awkward attempt to respond and disagree with Sirius' "No, never. PERIOD" comment.
He wasn't adopting it, he was disagreeing with it.
Everyone:
The comment in question has been refuted in many effective ways. There is no need to add more.

OK, I had suspicion of that being the case.

 

[CMoore]

OK, I had suspicion of that being the case.

Sorry it appeared that.
When i first posted (as i mentioned) i could not remember who had said that. When somebody brought it to my attention it was too late to add the quote, so i did a Copy/Paste.
I guess it looked a bit confusing.
Sorry About That

 

[spl]

Hey folks, don't worry the OP is entertained not misinformed by ... em ... spirited debate!

I had missed the subtlety that, with incident light, the dome of the meter is pointed at the camera, I was trying to point it at the sky, and being vintage I was getting odd readings. I used my €10 lux meter with a fixed lumisphere dome and indeed you are correct ... the sun is not a point light source! I feel like a rank amateur

I was thinking that the light meter measures a field of view and therefore might ignore light from the sky that still contributes to the image by reflecting off the subject, however if the lumisphere measures close to 180 degrees then this is not possible because the only light it doesn't measure would be coming from behind the subject which can't contribute to the image.

So, assuming a mid-grey subject (18% lux reflected) that means that the reflected light is 2.5 stops below the incident light. In general does a modern photographic light meter automatically reduce the reading by 2.5 stops, or does the lumisphere do this, so that you can use the measured value to set your camera? Or do you manually adjust 2.5 stops to turn incident into reflected?

Oh, and I have ordered the Ansul Adams Camera and Negative books, so I may have fewer basic questions in future, but thank you all for being informative and friendly.

 

[BrianShaw]

With all meters, incident, reflected or spot, the calculator (or display) provides a recommendation for exposure given the measured light. “Mental math” is only required if you feel a different exposure is required for how you desire to record the image.

Do you have a light meter (or meters) that do reflected and incident metering yet? The reading of light meter instructions and a few minutes of experimentation will be invaluable to your education!

 

[Alex Benjamin]

In general does a modern photographic light meter automatically reduce the reading by 2.5 stops, or does the lumisphere do this, so that you can use the measured value to set your camera?

In general, yes, you set your camera to what your meter tells you when working with incident metering.

As mentioned, the meter does not only measure the light coming directly from the sun, but, if positioned correctly where your subject is and pointed towards the camera, it also measures all the light bouncing off objects, ground, etc., and falling on your subject at different degrees. That means highlights and shadows should be correctly exposed since it's all the same light (shadows are lit by the same light as highlights, it's just that the light has bounced and is diffused towards them).

That said, it doesn't mean that you have to use the measurement offered by the meter. If your subject is very contrasty, i.e., part of it brightly lit and part of it in very deep shadow, you have the choice to keep it that way, but you also have the choice of changing the settings offered by the meter if, for example, you want a bit more details in the shadow. Of course, this will affect your highlights, but that's another matter.

Point is, the meter is a guide. You're the photographer and you can decide from this guide where you want to go, depending on what you want to see.

Photography is about your vision, and where and how you decide to meter will get you there. For example, if W. Eugene Smith had taken the meter reading from the shadows in his famous pick of his two children walking towards the light, the effect would have been totally lost. To me, this is a perfect example of using exposure to create a meaningful effect. Plus, as always with him, great darkroom work.

 

[Arthurwg]

"This forum member" is also one of the most arrogant you'll ever find anywhere--just look at how confident he was while screaming bad information into the thread. Speak for yourself on needing him.

You are sounding rather vindictive. Punished for arrogance? There are many of those on this forum.