Light meters and candid portraits!

[jasonjoo]

Hello everyone,

I've recently started shooting film, though at a snails pace. While I normally like to photograph landscapes, I find it difficult to travel, so most of my photography is candid portraits! Whether I'm with friends or family, or walking about the streets, I'm always inclined to take a portrait.

This was much easier with my digital camera because it had a built in meter, but now with my Rolleiflex, I'm finding it difficult to get any sort of candid shot.

Normally, if I want to take an exposure reading (99% of the time I use incident), I'll stick my light meter a foot or two away from my subject. However, this is not easy for a candid shot! Assuming that the lighting is somewhat even all through out, could I simply take a reading from afar? And if the lighting conditions aren't even (ie: spotlights), would it be best to take a reflective reading as opposed to an incident reading?

Sorry if this seems very basic!

Thanks,

Jason

 

[JBrunner]

Hello everyone,

I've recently started shooting film, though at a snails pace. While I normally like to photograph landscapes, I find it difficult to travel, so most of my photography is candid portraits! Whether I'm with friends or family, or walking about the streets, I'm always inclined to take a portrait.

This was much easier with my digital camera because it had a built in meter, but now with my Rolleiflex, I'm finding it difficult to get any sort of candid shot.

Normally, if I want to take an exposure reading (99% of the time I use incident), I'll stick my light meter a foot or two away from my subject. However, this is not easy for a candid shot! Assuming that the lighting is somewhat even all through out, could I simply take a reading from afar? And if the lighting conditions aren't even (ie: spotlights), would it be best to take a reflective reading as opposed to an incident reading?

Sorry if this seems very basic!

Thanks,

Jason

Hi Jason,

An incident reading facing the same direction is fine, provided the light is the same "over there" as it is where you are. Take care not to block the dome with your own body. You also have the lattitude with most B&W emulsions to error about 1/2 stop under or 1 stop over with little detriment, unless there is something extreme in the scene. For the ultimate in meter sniping, get a spot meter. Caucasion skin comes in around one stop over zone V, and black skin comes in about a stop under, in general, when using a spot meter. A general reflected reading can also be used, but those are also the readings that are the most prone to being "fooled" by bright or dark objects within a scene. If you keep that caveat in mind, a general wide field reflected reading can serve just as well.

 

[jasonjoo]

Thanks Jason. I don't think I'll be investing in a spot meter any time soon! It was always easy for me to make the appropriate exposure compensation with my digital system because when I looked through the viewfinder, I knew exactly what my camera was metering. Now with a light meter, I'm not quite sure how much light it's picking up and from where exactly, so even making the necessary adjustments is proving to be difficult.

I guess all of this will come with practice. I'll have to start developing my own b/w film soon too, but time has been limited as of late (btw, your video tutorials are fantastic!).

Another question: When using a filter of some sort (mainly a polarizer and lets say a red filter), how do you make the appropriate exposure compensation? I think my polarizer will absorb maybe 2 stops of light or so, but I'm not 100% sure. Also, I've never used a red filter, but I'm planning too. Do I need to make any adjustments to the exposure when using one of these?

Thanks again,

Jason

 

[JBrunner]

Thanks Jason. I don't think I'll be investing in a spot meter any time soon! It was always easy for me to make the appropriate exposure compensation with my digital system because when I looked through the viewfinder, I knew exactly what my camera was metering. Now with a light meter, I'm not quite sure how much light it's picking up and from where exactly, so even making the necessary adjustments is proving to be difficult.

I guess all of this will come with practice. I'll have to start developing my own b/w film soon too, but time has been limited as of late (btw, your video tutorials are fantastic!).

Another question: When using a filter of some sort (mainly a polarizer and lets say a red filter), how do you make the appropriate exposure compensation? I think my polarizer will absorb maybe 2 stops of light or so, but I'm not 100% sure. Also, I've never used a red filter, but I'm planning too. Do I need to make any adjustments to the exposure when using one of these?

Thanks again,

Jason

Hi Jason,

Glad you like the videos.

When you use an incedent meter, it averages all the light falling on the dome, so provided the dome is in the right place, or a place just like the place you are shooting, the exposure is correct for the light falling on the meter. I don't know what your finances are like, but a properly functioning old school spot meter is most probably the most educational tool for photography in existence.

In regard to compensating for Pola's the typical compensation is about 1&1/2 stops no matter how the polarizer is oriented. A few Pola's, like the Schnieder tru-pol need two stops. If a filter is changing the color of light, that means it is absorbing some of it, and so your exposure must be compensated accordingly. With red, it will depend on exactly which "red" filter you are using, but compensation can range up to 3 stops or so. Most persons find the effect of red a little severe for all situations, so you might consider adding yellow and orange to your kit as well, for a choice of effect.
The exact filter factor for a given filter usually comes with the filter, or can be looked up.

Hope this is helpful.

J

 

[SuzanneR]

fodder for another video, Jason?

And I'd agree... I often take an incident reading when making portraits. and unless the light changes dramatically, I keep the camera set to the reading. A spot meter is very handy, I usually meter of the shadow side of the face (caucasion), I will adjust the exposure with darker skin when using a spot. Nice thing with a spot meter... I don't scare young kids off by sticking a meter right in their faces!!

You really don't need to adjust your expposure for each and every shot. I often check readings during shoots, and they rarely change.

Good luck!

 

[panastasia]

Jason, try a yellow filter for rendering skin tones accurately (in most situations), you'll need to adjust for only one stop (increase exposure) and you can adjust the camera film speed setting to calibrate for the one stop adjustment, then read the meter directly, or adjust the meter instead - same difference. You can do this for any filter if you know the filter factor.

Regards,
Paul

 

[jasonjoo]

Wow, thanks for the quick responses!

I should have clarified, the polarizer and red filter were for landscape work! I thought I would sneak in another question while I had someone's attention

Thanks for the suggestions. Being the noobie that I am, I take exposure readings from the light meter almost before every shot. Assuming the lighting conditions are somewhat similar, I'll keep one reading dialed in and fire away.

Jason

 

[eddym]

One of the most important things a photographer can learn is to "see the light." Yes, an incident meter will give the same reading at your position as at the subject as long as you are both illuminated by the same source. Outdoors in daytime, this is normally the sun, so unless you are under a tree and the subject is in an open field, you should both be receiving the same illumination.
But with experience -and paying attention to your light meter readings- you should be able to learn to "see" differences in light levels as they occur. Say you are both in the sun, and a cloud passes over; the light reading will drop. If it becomes generally overcast, the light will drop more. As the sun sets or rises, the light will change. Taking incident readings as the lighting changes, watching the aperture setting change as the shutter speed remains constant, will teach you a lot about light, and you will be able to react quickly to that sudden cloud passing without even needing to meter for every shot.
Newbies become experts by paying attention to the light!

 

[Dave Miller]

The older type monochrome film is, as has been said above, tolerant to under or over exposure to a surprising degree. It may be worth experimenting with a film to convince yourself of this. Try exposing the same scene at the “correct” exposure and 1, 2, and 3 stops over and under. Print the frames and see which are too far out.
I would also advocate learning the “sunny sixteen” exposure scale. Old time press photographers never had the benefit of exposure meters, but could set their exposure correctly from experience. With a little practice you could do the same. Try estimating the exposure and then take a light meter reading, see how close you can get.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

If there is one kind of picture where auto exposure beats a handheld meter, it's candid portraits! Any theoretical loss of quality will be more than made up for by the gain in spontaneity.

Regards.

David

 

[arigram]

For street I carry a Gossen Sixtoman Digital. When I go out I aim it at a sunny part of the street, then at a dark part and that's my ballpark.
With a good "street film" like HP5+ and TriX I don't worry about over and under exposure.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

You don't need to meter every shot, if the lighting conditions are not changing. You'll usually get more consistent exposures, if you just take one reading and use it until the lighting conditions change, or if you're in a situation with two predominant lighting conditions (say full sun and open shade--usually about 3 stops apart), take two readings and be aware of which one applies to the subject in any given shot. I find this approach much more spontaneous than metering every shot in camera, and much more consistent than auto exposure.

So take one reading, be aware of changing light, and you can be spontaneous.

 

[panastasia]

You don't need to meter every shot.....

So take one reading, be aware of changing light, and you can be spontaneous.

Good advice! I agree with what David said.

 

[CBG]

In regard to compensating for Pola's the typical compensation is about 1&1/2 stops no matter how the polarizer is oriented. A few Pola's, like the Schnieder tru-pol need two stops.

I wasn't aware of the Tru-Pol. Can you say what makes it different and what makes it need the larger factor?

Thanks,

C

 

[JBrunner]

I wasn't aware of the Tru-Pol. Can you say what makes it different and what makes it need the larger factor?

Thanks,

C

I had assumed they had released it in a version for stills, but I guess they haven't. It's actually called "True-Pol" I can't tell you how it works, just that it works very well.

http://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=448&IID=2308

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I had assumed they had released it in a version for stills, but I guess they haven't. It's actually called "True-Pol" I can't tell you how it works, just that it works very well.

http://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=448&IID=2308

That looks like a useful thing, particularly for me since it comes standard in 4X4". Is it glass mounted?

 

[JBrunner]

That looks like a useful thing, particularly for me since it comes standard in 4X4". Is it glass mounted?

Hi David,

Yes, it's glass. The cine matte boxes have rotating filter stages, so the only problem using it on a still camera would be mounting it so it could be oriented.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thanks. I've got a rotating filter mount for my Sinar and one for my 10" WF Ektar, and I suppose I could use a Lee Gel Snap on some of my other lenses.

 

[CBG]

I had assumed they had released it in a version for stills, but I guess they haven't. It's actually called "True-Pol" I can't tell you how it works, just that it works very well.

http://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=448&IID=2308

I just sent Schneider a query on how they work / what's different about them...

Thanks!

C

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Jason, my metering method would work well for you.
I know the palm of my (caucasian) hand is maybe a
stop brighter than midgrey. So, when shooting the sort
of scene you describe, I hold my hand out in roughly
the same orientation to the sun as my subject appears,
and take a reflective meter reading off of it. And then
I adjust the reading by a stop and I am ready to shoot.

I agree with the other posters that traditional B+W
emulsions are somewhat tolerant of exposure variations.
In my experience, they are much more tolerant of
overexposures. Underexposures will turn shadows
into indistinct blobs, while overexposures do not
seem to damage highlights as much. So when in
doubt, I open up and let more light in.

RFXB