To the OP: why do you feel such a great need to dictate to strangers on the internet how to make their art? That seems like the ultimate in futility to me.
I am delighted that others have already addressed your use of the words, "right" and "wrong" (mostly "wrong"), so I don't have to. Those words are much harder to define than under and over exposure, and tend to convey a moral judgement, so should probably be avoided.
Basically, you have to have all the exposures on a roll needing the same development, unlike sheet film. You can't have the start of the roll needing N+1 and the end of the roll needing N-2 for example.
I also agree. If someone asks me how I like to do something, or for specific advice, I'm happy to share what works for me. But I don't have the time to convince people on the Internet that they're wrong--especially when they seem happy with their methods and results.
Incident meter the shadows (facing the camera) and shoot at the box speed.
How else do you explain the notion that the AE-1 is one of the greatest "beginner cameras"?
As someone who sold AE-1s when they revolutionized the industry, I can assure you that for many, many people the notion was completely true!
They, of course, were coming to 35mm SLR photography and slide film from the Instamatics and point and shoot cameras they used before.
Wrong!As a former photography teacher, the K1000 is THE best beginner camera!
Yeah, but that's only true In Canada.
On a slightly more serious note, the camera that created the industry in the first place was the Leica IIIf. I still own one made in the 1950s, and apart from routine servicing and adjustment, it has been flawless. It's a marvel of simplicity and engineering. The IIIf literally created the 35mm still photography category as a widely accepted thing.
Yeah, but that's only true In Canada.
On a slightly more serious note, the camera that created the industry in the first place was the Leica IIIf. I still own one made in the 1950s, and apart from routine servicing and adjustment, it has been flawless. It's a marvel of simplicity and engineering. The IIIf literally created the 35mm still photography category as a widely accepted thing.
There are two IIIf's in my little collection of LTM Leicas. They are indeed excellent cameras. But when I was growing up in the 1950's in Illinois and then Oklahoma I saw a lot of Argus C3's and just two Leicas, one of which was my father's.
I was thinking of that exact demonstration when I read the quoted passage! What is the shadow is a very important question, with a non obvious answer.Wait! No. When you incident meter the shadows, the meter is supposed to be uprated. This is a BTZS (Beyond the Zone System - Davis) practice.
I don't. I do feel a great need to do what I can, where I can, to provide education in the face of much, much bad information and the echo chamber that is the Internet. How else do you explain the notion that the AE-1 is one of the greatest "beginner cameras"?
Seriously, I do think that with the high cost and possible frustration levels, it's good if those of us who started in the era of good Photo 101 courses can pass that knowledge on to younger folks. The more people into film, and the more people who have success with film, the better for all of us.
But I could also just have narcissistic tendencies.
That XKCD cartoon was on my mind when I wrote that post!
It seems like some people are defining "overexposure" as metering at an EI below box speed, and "underexposure" is defined as metering at above box speed. These definitions depend on the assumption that metering at box speed gives the "correct exposure," which may or may not be true. And it ignores the fact that the box ISO speed was determined using a specific set of developing parameters. If you use a different developer, processing time, or agitation scheme, then the "correct exposure" is no longer correct.
Some people underexpose and push-process to get more contrast and grain, particularly with B&W.
Some people overexpose because they like the more contrasty/punchy look.
Wait! No. When you incident meter the shadows, the meter is supposed to be uprated. This is a BTZS (Beyond the Zone System - Davis) practice.
I was thinking of that exact demonstration when I read the quoted passage! What is the shadow is a very important question, with a non obvious answer.
In the example given in the book he said that many people make the mistake of trying to find the deepest, darkest shadow they can and metering off that.I have only read the first edition of Phil Davis' book, as I understand the process, he uses (used) an incident meter to meter the shadows for zone III or II,
I have only read the first edition of Phil Davis' book, as I understand the process, he uses (used) an incident meter to meter the shadows
Yes this is BTZS and puts the shadow to middle gray*.Wait! No. When you incident meter the shadows, the meter is supposed to be uprated. This is a BTZS (Beyond the Zone System - Davis) practice.
Yes this is BTZS and puts the shadow to middle gray*.
But most of the films true speed is less than a box almost which is always* a stop less. This would compensate the incident metering of shadows.
Otherwise said, this will put the shadows in middle gray.
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?