Metering....Over or Under?

[Screwdriver]

When metering, is it best to overexpose or under to get closest to what the camera can be set at? With Slide, color negs, B&W negs?

 

[Ektagraphic]

It kind of depends on the situation. For most negative films I think slightly over is better than under. With slide I would go as close as possible but make a judgement on your scene wether slightly lighter or darker is okay. How are you metering?

 

[Screwdriver]

It kind of depends on the situation. For most negative films I think slightly over is better than under. With slide I would go as close as possible but make a judgement on your scene wether slightly lighter or darker is okay. How are you metering?

With a Sekonic L-358 incident and flash.

 

[MikeSeb]

OK, I think I know what you're getting at: meter reading falls "between" settings, whaddya
do?

In most situations I'd cheat towards overexposure with negative films, or underexposure with positive films. But with incident metering of studio flash, unless you have a good feel for things, I'd opt to underexpose to keep from blowing highlights.

Only experimentation with your overall "system" of exposure and processing can definitively answer this question.

 

[eddym]

You can't set your lens aperture between stops?

 

[lxdude]

A good incident reading is generally very trustable. With transparencies, a little underexposure is usually preferable to any overexposure, though I've heard Velvia users say a little over helps open up shadows and helps with scanning. Slight overexposure doesn't hurt color negatives as it adds density to the negative, so highlight detail is retained, and dark shadows will tend to be less grainy. Due to the greater latitude, a full stop either way seldom makes much difference. I expect C-41 B+W is similar (I've never used it).

Regular B+W negative has similar properties but is a whole other thing. Generally overexposure is preferable to underexposure. The basic properties of color neg apply to any negative film, but the possibilities with B+W are so vast as to defy one simple answer. Different developers and different developing methods result in many possibilities for the properties of the negative. Choose a film/developer/method combination and stick with it until you know it.

When you're unsure, bracketing is your best insurance and your best teacher. Record settings so you'll know exactly what you did to get each result. As you know more, you'll get good at judging what to do.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

You can't set your lens aperture between stops?

Course you can. Some lenses even have stops in between stops, but if they don't, you might become a victim of mechanical hystereses. This means, due to mechanical tolerances (slag), it makes a difference if you are closing or opening the aperture to get to the same position. I got into the habit of always closing, even if this means to open for a couple of stops first. I hope this made sense?

 

[Screwdriver]

A good incident reading is generally very trustable. With transparencies, a little underexposure is usually preferable to any overexposure, though I've heard Velvia users say a little over helps open up shadows and helps with scanning. Slight overexposure doesn't hurt color negatives as it adds density to the negative, so highlight detail is retained, and dark shadows will tend to be less grainy. Due to the greater latitude, a full stop either way seldom makes much difference. I expect C-41 B+W is similar (I've never used it).

Regular B+W negative has similar properties but is a whole other thing. Generally overexposure is preferable to underexposure. The basic properties of color neg apply to any negative film, but the possibilities with B+W are so vast as to defy one simple answer. Different developers and different developing methods result in many possibilities for the properties of the negative. Choose a film/developer/method combination and stick with it until you know it.

When you're unsure, bracketing is your best insurance and your best teacher. Record settings so you'll know exactly what you did to get each result. As you know more, you'll get good at judging what to do.

Thanks for the info!

I have been shooting film for close to 30 years now and used to be able to guess the exposure. Lately though I have been experimenting with lighting and the camera meter just doesn't cut it. So I just bought the Sekonic to help with getting the exposure. First thing I noticed was that my Nikons and my wifes Minolta all overexpose by up to one stop.

I guess I will keep experimenting with the meter. Before I was chimping with my DSLR...but it always made me feel dirty.

 

[2F/2F]

It is best to be right on (meaning to expose in a way that gives you what you want) with any in-camera photographic method of capture; digital, b/w, E-6, C-41, etc. The meter tells you a certain technical thing; NOT the correct exposure, PERIOD. It is up to you to know the technical details that allow you to turn what the meter says into the exposure that will give you the piece of film that will give you what you want in the final product.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I usually go a little above and a little below.

Jeff

 

[2F/2F]

Course you can. Some lenses even have stops in between stops, but if they don't, you might become a victim of mechanical hystereses. This means, due to mechanical tolerances (slag), it makes a difference if you are closing or opening the aperture to get to the same position. I got into the habit of always closing, even if this means to open for a couple of stops first. I hope this made sense?

I do the same thing. My very first large format photography teacher taught us to do it. He said to always stop down to the intended aperture from wide open, not to open up to it. In other words, he said if you need to go from a smaller aperture to a larger one, open up all the way first. Makes sense, though I have never actually tested for the difference. Perhaps on a perfectly healthy diaphragm, it would not actually make much of a difference.

 

[2F/2F]

I totally misread the question. I'm sorry for giving the standard answer to the question I thought you were asking!

You are not talking exposure compensation here...you are talking precision; what to do when the precision of your camera/lens does not match the precision of your light meter. For instance, you only have whole shutter speeds, or only have 1/2 click stops, when your meter is precise down to 1/3 stops.

So, the simple answer is that for negative film, it is better to be that teeny bit over. For positive film, it is better to be that teeny bit under...though in reality, it is really just s teeny bit in either case, and will not be the difference between a usable shot and an unusable shot.

This is yet another reason that I like analog dials on my light meters.....it is my one peeve with the Pentax Digital Spot Meter.

 

[eddym]

Course you can. Some lenses even have stops in between stops, but if they don't, you might become a victim of mechanical hystereses. This means, due to mechanical tolerances (slag), it makes a difference if you are closing or opening the aperture to get to the same position. I got into the habit of always closing, even if this means to open for a couple of stops first. I hope this made sense?

Sorry Ralph, I was referring to the OP.
But that's a good suggestion about opening before closing. I'll remember it.

 

[benjiboy]

It is best to be right on (meaning to expose in a way that gives you what you want) with any in-camera photographic method of capture; digital, b/w, E-6, C-41, etc. The meter tells you a certain technical thing; NOT the correct exposure, PERIOD. It is up to you to know the technical details that allow you to turn what the meter says into the exposure that will give you the piece of film that will give you what you want in the final product.

I agree with you entirely, a light meter is like a slide rule, it's a guessing stick, it doesn't give you the answers, it just enables you to ask the right questions.

 

[benjiboy]

With a Sekonic L-358 incident and flash.

You can with the Sekonic- L 358 by changing the configuration the dip switches in the battery compartment set the meter to read to the nearest 1/10, 1/2, or full stops. I have mine set to the nearest half stop, and it works with all films for me, have another look at the instruction book.

 

[Screwdriver]

You can with the Sekonic- L 358 by changing the configuration the dip switches in the battery compartment set the meter to read to the nearest 1/10, 1/2, or full stops. I have mine set to the nearest half stop, and it works with all films for me, have another look at the instruction book.

I set the dip switches to 1/3, made more sense to me. With the 1/2 it missed my apertures I normally use.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

It is best to be right on (meaning to expose in a way that gives you what you want) with any in-camera photographic method of capture; digital, b/w, E-6, C-41, etc. The meter tells you a certain technical thing; NOT the correct exposure, PERIOD. It is up to you to know the technical details that allow you to turn what the meter says into the exposure that will give you the piece of film that will give you what you want in the final product.

Entirely agree. The same is true for darkroom meters by the way.

 

[keithwms]

When metering, is it best to overexpose or under to get closest to what the camera can be set at? With Slide, color negs, B&W negs?

With neg film I'd always err on the side of overexposure.

With slide, I'd tend to err on the side of slight underexposure, but if the shot matters, I'd also bracket one up and one down... esp. if the desired output requires a scan. My experience with slides is that slightly underexposed ones project best, but slightly overexposed ones scan best. So often I shoot for both options... and really there's only approx. a half stop or so between my slide brackets, I am not saying go +/- 1 stop, that's too much usually. So when I say slight I mean slight

Note that these ^^^ decisions do not require a change in the aperture, which in my view is usually an artistic choice, not a technical one. I mean, what if the lens is wide open... you can't open it wider; moreover you may prefer to shoot it wide open for reasons of bokeh and/or DOF (I like my 50/1.2 wide open and I like several of my MF and LF lenses wide open). Yes, I admit that's an extreme example, but overall I am not comfortable with the idea of aperture controlling exposure. It's a coupled variable; it's coupled to nothing short of what will appear in or out of focus, so it's a very important thing! Whereas shutter speed differences of a half stop or so very rarely make a difference for my subject matter. So... my aperture decisions are almost always based on other issues.... bokeh, DOF, coverage and so forth.

 

[benjiboy]

I set the dip switches to 1/3, made more sense to me. With the 1/2 it missed my apertures I normally use.

Maybe that's why you can't set your apertures precisely enough most modern lenses are click stopped at half stops, I know mine are.

 

[BetterSense]

Tend toward overexposure with negative films, for two reasons.

First, it's statistically safer to err toward overexposure. Consider that you are making a 10-second exposure, and you are really bad at counting. If you are 5-seconds short, your exposure will be a stop off. If you are 5-seconds long, your exposure will be only 1/2 a stop off. Now replace counting skill with random mechanical variations in the shutter, the aperture, the meter, etc. These variations will most likely be linear whereas film exposure is logarithmic. Thus purely statistically, it's best to err on the side of overexposure.

The second reason is that negative films, shot at normal EIs, tolerate overexposure better than underexposure. So not only is it easier to accidentally underexpose by a lot than to accidentally overexpose by a lot, a given underexposure has a worse effect than a given overexposure.

 

[Screwdriver]

Maybe that's why you can't set your apertures precisely enough most modern lenses are click stopped at half stops, I know mine are.

Hmmm...have you ever used the Sekonic L-385? Because at 1/3 it hits all my lenses, so not sure why you would think it wouldn't....

 

[benjiboy]

Hmmm...have you ever used the Sekonic L-385? Because at 1/3 it hits all my lenses, so not sure why you would think it wouldn't....

Yes I've had one for over two years , and I have the 1 degree spot attachment, I've been using hand held exposure meters for more than fifty years and selling them at a professional dealers for more than twenty , the L358 is one of the best meters I have ever owned,and is something of an industry standard these days, could you explain what you mean by " it hits all my lenses"?

 

[Screwdriver]

Yes I've had one for over two years , and I have the 1 degree spot attachment, I've been using hand held exposure meters for more than fifty years and selling them at a professional dealers for more than twenty , the L358 is one of the best meters I have ever owned,and is something of an industry standard these days, could you explain what you mean by " it hits all my lenses"?

Then I am surprised by this quote, since you own one and have a long history using and selling meters in general.

Maybe that's why you can't set your apertures precisely enough most modern lenses are click stopped at half stops, I know mine are.

At 1/3 setting you have the most aperture and shutter speed settings. At 1/2 it missed some of the speeds on my cameras. My N90s for example has shutter speeds in 1/3 stop settings. Plus I have some odd cameras that have non-standard apertures that only show when the meter is in 1/3.

My OP, was not about getting a specific aperture, it was more about if I should over or under expose certain types of film.

 

[jp80874]

I only shoot B&W negative film so my suggestion only fits that. When in doubt bracket. If you believe that you can make a very good print either on the correct exposure or one stop off, and you bracket by two stops, you have a six stop range of making a good print. Before you say, oh that is too expensive or a waste of film, know that I only shoot 8x10 and 7x17.

John Powers

 

[jolefler]

I'm gonna buy John...

a 35mm P&S.......Lord knows he can't afford one when bracketing all that surface area

Jo