It is nice to see you got that to work. A while back I downloaded one of those apps and, either my iPhone was no good as a meter or it was poor software, but it was very slow to respond and never seemed to give the same readings of the same area twice. Due to the uncertainty, it was a pain to use. Maybe the software was intended for people with plastic cameras without meters.Beyond technical considerations, what I have just learned is that with my particular phone model I can get perfectly accurate incident meterings, I've checked it well.
It is nice to see you got that to work. A while back I downloaded one of those apps and, either my iPhone was no good as a meter or it was poor software, but it was very slow to respond and never seemed to give the same readings of the same area twice. Due to the uncertainty, it was a pain to use. Maybe the software was intended for people with plastic cameras without meters.
I think macfred meant that his favorite photographers didn’t care a lick for their light meters if they used it at all.Most of those cited only seem to have largely only referred to a meter if using colour. HCB was notorious for not caring for meters & for liking quite generously exposed negs (which irritated at least one of his printers - if it was Tri-X in certain developers, I can see why). And Atget wasn't really dealing with what we'd call a 'narrow latitude' system. The EV system is pretty accurate.
In the Owens Valley shot the camera is in the shadow so you are to measure the incident light in the shadow, while the far snowy mountain is illuminated by direct sun rays, having a very strong incident illumination around 3 stops higher.
What you quoted was a response to 138S talking about "incident" metering apps that use the front camera, stating they'd work more or less the same (perhaps more "directional" as a diffused actual incident meter. If that was the case, then any camera that meters off the sensor would read the same exposure whether pointed toward the light source or toward the subject, as it's designed to. That's obvious humbug.
As to others getting hung up on dome vs. disk diffuser, I think that's beside the point. The phone camera has no diffuser at all and as such direct light will strike the sensor, making the reading too high in these situations. So as far as these apps do work in such situations, it must be by computational power (identifying a light source in the picture to adjust the reading), I think error prone.
Is there anyone out here who practices photography ?
A while back I downloaded one of those apps and, either my iPhone was no good as a meter or it was poor software, but it was very slow to respond and never seemed to give the same readings of the same area twice.
I think you answered to your question; measure incident at the shadow, expose -3 stops ?
Amen. Applies to all formats too.My view is that this is not about determining what is the best way to meter. IMO a LF photographer should master all the possible ways to meter, from smelling the scene to accurate spot metering, including of course Sunny 16. Later one does what he wants, but he does it after treasuring a solid criterion.
TEST PERFORMED
For incident metering, I've completed an extensive practical test, playing for some 60min in different illumination situations including direct sunlight, and pointing the meters to different directions.
Compared a Lux Meter to that App+Xiaomi Note 8 Pro.
Result: I got discrepances of about 15% nominal in the reading, this would be under 1/4 of stop perhaps 1/6. We may find that discrepance is common between commercial meters.
Disclaimer: Apps may allow to adjust corrections for the offset and gain, still some smartphones may sport a very directional senstivity that require a very different interpretation. IMO it can be recommended that anyone wanting to use the smartphone for incident metering he should check the consistence of the readings with an Lux meter or at least comparing with the spot metering on a grey card, checking different orientations to the light source.
(Since my Weston Master IV died I had no incident meter, personally I use Spot a lot, but I wanted to know if my particular phone could deliver a reliable reading if wanted, if I was always incident metering I would like a Sekonic or a charming Weston).
Is there anyone out here who practices photography ?
I really have no idea why people want to make metering as difficult as possible - they should be able to get a more than sufficiently accurate exposure with one meter reading, two if they really need to know the contrast range.
When calibrated they will all be the same.
They have nothing better to do with their lives. They also like endless mindless testing. No need to do photography when you can make taking a light reading of one scene last a life time.
They have nothing better to do with their lives. They also like endless mindless testing. No need to do photography when you can make taking a light reading of one scene last a life time.
They have nothing better to do with their lives. They also like endless mindless testing. No need to do photography when you can make taking a light reading of one scene last a life time.
So we'll see if I'm chasing windmills with this procedure.
If I'm shooting chromes, I'll err on the histogram to the dark side so I don't clip the whites. Likewise, if I'm shooting BW negative film, I'll err with the histogram to the right so I capture the shadows and don;t clip them. If the range is acceptable so it all fits without clipping on either end, I'll stick the histogram in the middle and use that expsorue.IMO this is pretty viable. Digital and slides have in common their limited highlight latitude, IMO the DSLR may provide a very acceptable preview on the resulting slide. Personally I would adjust that procedure with 35mm film. For well selected sample scenes I would use the same base exposure, then I would bracket both the 35mm film and the digital shots. This would tell what exposure compensation to use in the digital camera to take the preview shot in the way highlights would result similarly blown when overexposed. Perhaps to preview the shadows another exposure compensation has be used.
Also it would be important to disable some features in the DSLR.
Im my case, I tried to use the DSLR to preview/learn the color filtration effect, on a doubt (orange vs red) I have placed each filter in the DSLR and shot BW mode. What had been really useful to me was using 35mm to bracket filter type vs exposure just to learn, but sometimes y used the DSLR for the filter effect preview before spending a big sheet.
Still, for slides, what resulted the most useful to me was bracketing+spotmetering+taking_notes in different situation, to know how sky/clouds/terrain/people results at different over/under exposure levels, so know I've a criterion to refine and balance the exposure, and to select a graded ND. Negative film is more forgiving if enough exposure is provided... But you know, slides have to be nailed... and is the slide is a sheet then better to check it twice !!! "Mesure twice and cut once" = "Meter twice and nail the exposure of the slide"
Of course, what I have to be careful with, is that film has less latitude than my digital camera.
Yes... IMO this is... you have to correlate the highlight clipping in the histogram with the one in the slide.
Probably a sound way would be exposing well in the DSLR and knowing what +/- exposure compensation you have to adjust in the Slide exposure yo have the same clipping you allow in the histogram. So it would be the counter I pointed before... Expose in the digital camera to have acceptable highlights, then use the same base exposure for the 35mm test slide film, then bracket. This will tell you the exposure compensation for the slide that is to deliver a similar highlight latitude for the slide than for the Digital Camera pre-shot.
For what I used DSLR pre-shots is for learning studio portraiture, rigging the DSLR to a SINAR Norma, mostly to preview the illumination effects. The Norma was firing the DSLR and the DSLR was controlling the Bowens strobes, to refine my understanding of the modeling illumination. I also found that it was quite useful to realize the resulting expression in the subject and to know if eyes were well open...
DSLR can be a powerful aid for LF, IMO at all to substitute the classic metering ways, just a nice additional resource.
Remove the dome of an incident meter and you'll realize why this is not only about calibration, and why the diffuser dome was placed on the photocell.
Are there light meters that that have reflective, incident and spot metering modes all in one device?
I know that for example the Sekonic L-858D has spot metering and incident metering but I think it doesn’t have this reflective metering mode like my Gossen Profisix has.
I know what you mean. But to clarify it for those who might not, spot meters andother meters all have the same "precision". The meter provides readings that are at the same accuracy. All spot meters do is narrow how much area they are reading to let's say 1-degree wide angle. That doesn't make them more precise. In fact, if you select the wrong 1 degree to read, you'll get a worse reading than if you used center metering or matrix metering.Spot meter is reflective reading but more precise.
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?