Sunny 16.. very accurate

[markbarendt]

cool.. Got any guesses on cloudy ?

ToddB

http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm

 

[Yashinoff]

I shoot a lot of transparency film, and don't have or use a meter.

Apologies for the image quality and 35mm... I don't have a scanner. But just as an example this scene is not so straightforward as mid-day sun on your front lawn. Once you've got an eye for it you can figure it out, most of the time you just need to consider the deepness and contrast of shadows for a good indication of how bright it is. A meter becomes more handy the duller it gets, when you can no longer rely on shadows to give a good indication of the light.

I would not however advise anybody to not have a meter with them. When you need it, you'll really need it. But your eyes can be pretty darn accurate for most situations.

 

[PentaxBronica]

I do a night photography project every year and have found that similar rules apply at night. The moon is usually as bright as a sunny 16 day (If you were to take a picture of the moon), you can zone meter accordingly and get results that work. This comes in handy as sometimes batteries freeze in Canadian winter nights making light meters moot.

Not too surprising, it is illuminated by the same sunlight after all!

I have a metered prism for my ETRSi and a couple of ancient handheld meters which came as part of ebay camera lots. I don't tend to use them though as I like the waist level finder (and I'm not so keen on the bulk of the speed winder if walking around with the camera, without that I find it very hard to hold the camera steady with a prism finder on). I only shoot B&W negative film at the moment and for that I find Sunny 16 works pretty well.

Of late I've taken to trying to guess the correct exposure with my 35mm cameras before I activate the metering. I'm usually right to within half a stop or so, and it makes a good check for metering faults (like the ME Super I had which underexposed by two stops until I dripped lighter fluid into the film speed mechanism and worked thirty years of gunk out).

What I have noticed is that it's better to look for shadows than it is to try to guess light levels, especially if you have self-tinting glasses or sunglasses on. You also need to think about location - I'd guess that my shaded front garden would probably be about f5.6 at the moment, while the sunlit part of the back garden would be f11-f16.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Not necessarily the case. I have successfully shot plenty of Provia (in 4x5 no less!) at mid day with nothing more than Sunny-16.

Move into deep woods with the same film and you'l find that meter pretty handy.
I haven't been claiming sunny-16 doesn't work, at mid-day and in other simple lighting conditions. I am claiming it's no substitute for a meter. The reason being, that if you are filling the whole scale of whichever film you are using there is no exposure latitude; any deviation and either the highlights or shadows are not what I want. I like to know what I have on the film before I process it (aka previsualisation), and my printing is done with an enlarger - no fauxtoshoppe - or contacts from 8x10.

 

[benjiboy]

Move into deep woods with the same film and you'l find that meter pretty handy.
I haven't been claiming sunny-16 doesn't work, at mid-day and in other simple lighting conditions. I am claiming it's no substitute for a meter. The reason being, that if you are filling the whole scale of whichever film you are using there is no exposure latitude; any deviation and either the highlights or shadows are not what I want. I like to know what I have on the film before I process it (aka previsualisation), and my printing is done with an enlarger - no fauxtoshoppe - or contacts from 8x10.

I've known how to use "sunny sixteen" since I was a teenager in the 1950s when light meters were much less common and far beyond the pocket of a schoolboy, but nowadays when perfectly usable meters can be bought so inexpensively, is it some form of inverse snobbery that some people think they are too clever to use them ?

 

[bushpig]

...is it some form of inverse snobbery that some people think they are too clever to use them ?

No. Some people just prefer not too. I don't see why it's such a big deal. Some people are able to get by just fine without them. I don't think those people deserve to be told that they're wrong because they don't do things the same as someone else.

 

[wblynch]

Some people eat with their hands, some use fine silver and still others use a big old wooden spoon.

At least they eat.

 

[benjiboy]

No. Some people just prefer not too. I don't see why it's such a big deal. Some people are able to get by just fine without them. I don't think those people deserve to be told that they're wrong because they don't do things the same as someone else.

It's not the fact they do things differently but the air of smug superiority that many of them have as if they're too clever/talented to use a light meter.

 

[Ian C]

I’ve always thought of the “Sunny-16” rule as a way to get the exposure approximately right on negative film when the meter stops working, the battery fails, or I find that I forgot to pack the meter into the camera bag.

It’s also useful for folks with a simple meterless camera whose aperture and shutter speed can be adjusted, but don’t own a meter.

For most folks this isn’t a matter of feeling superior, but rather as a means to correct exposure in those lighting situations that can be classified reasonably well in accordance to the Sunny-16 Rule. It’s particularly valuable in the full version that covers a variety of different lighting conditions and when a meter is unavailable or fails for some reason.

An example of this is given in post #9 wherein the film maker modifies the Sunny-16 Rule to favor moderate overexposure to help ensure that adequate shadow detail is recorded.

 

[benjiboy]

I was using "sunny sixteen" before most of my fellow members were born, but I still stand by what I wrote, I consider it an act of foolishness in this day and age.

 

[ME Super]

I went on a slide bender today to get some of the fall colors on film. I was shooting a slow film (Provia 100F) under overcast skies, under the canopy. The camera was giving me exposure times around a second at f/22 (going for the blur on the one waterfall that was flowing because it's been so dry here). Far from simple full sun. I relied on my camera's meter. I'll find out when I get the slides back from the lab whether it metered okay. Chances are, it did.

 

[benjiboy]

I went on a slide bender today to get some of the fall colors on film. I was shooting a slow film (Provia 100F) under overcast skies, under the canopy. The camera was giving me exposure times around a second at f/22 (going for the blur on the one waterfall that was flowing because it's been so dry here). Far from simple full sun. I relied on my camera's meter. I'll find out when I get the slides back from the lab whether it metered okay. Chances are, it did.

I'm not saying that light meters are infallible and their readings should be used without modification, I think their readings should be considered as a basis, in light of the photographers experience before making the exposure.

 

[Yashinoff]

I was using "sunny sixteen" before most of my fellow members were born, but I still stand by what I wrote, I consider it an act of foolishness in this day and age.

It certainly would be foolish if it weren't useful.

 

[Pioneer]

I was using "sunny sixteen" before most of my fellow members were born, but I still stand by what I wrote, I consider it an act of foolishness in this day and age.

I personally like to use the Sunny 16 system because it allows me to carry and use cameras like my Leica IIIc without packing any additional equipment. It has nothing to do with being snobby or feeling better then anyone else. I just enjoy the spontaneity of the whole process. There are many who feel that those of us who still shoot film in this day and age are being "foolish" as well. Not only do I like using Sunny 16, I also enjoy working with the Zone System and using spot metering to help me place the particular light values in my image. When the light is difficult to read I personally have found that the most accurate metering system I can use is incident metering. Each method has its uses and to say that using any of them are an "act of foolishness" seems to be a bit silly.

But, to each his own. You no longer like to use Sunny 16 and you probably are not comfortable unless you are absolutely certain of the light in the scene you want to photograph. That is fine and it works for you. There are others who are just as happy with a Holga even though they aren't even certain that they will get a usable image at all. And some people are certainly experienced enough with their Holgas to get some awesome images. Fortunately there is room in photography for all of us.

 

[removed account4]

It's not the fact they do things differently but the air of smug superiority that many of them have as if they're too clever/talented to use a light meter.

hi ben

i use a meter when i am on a job for someone,
and i am being paid to make perfect exposures &c ..
but when i am just out doing whatever it might be
that i am doing with a camera .. i don't bother
bringing a meter mainly because i'm tired of using
a meter and seeing i can pretty much look at the light
and see what an average meter will give me
i don't really see the point of using one ...
besides the LF cameras i am using these days
don't have more than 1 shutter speed and 1 aperture
so it would be kind of a waste of time anyways ...
i process my film bullet proof and print it with a 300 ( or is it 350? )W
bulb and sometimes the sun so a little more or less light doesn't really
make much of a difference ( for me at least ) ... or i shoot
hand coated glass or paper negatives and my exposures are seconds,
not fractions of seconds ...

not cleaver, talent ( maybe lack of it ? ) or smug superiority
just the little rut i am riding at the moment.
when i get bored again, maybe i'll use a different camera, and a meter ...

i figure if someone wants to use a meter, great, more power to them
but if they don't ... good for them, they are learning about the light
and that can't be bad ...

YMMV

 

[michaelbsc]

http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm

+1

This works amazingly well.

 

[Vaughn]

I was photographing in the redwoods yesterday -- incredible light and no wind. Instead of sunny 16 with 125ASA film (f16 at 1/125th sec) I was using f16 at 4 seconds (actually f64 for 4 minutes).

 

[bushpig]

It's not the fact they do things differently but the air of smug superiority that many of them have as if they're too clever/talented to use a light meter.

I was using "sunny sixteen" before most of my fellow members were born, but I still stand by what I wrote, I consider it an act of foolishness in this day and age.

Really? Nobody else wants to comment on the irony here?

 

[Chan Tran]

I have 2 Minolta meters. Luckily they read the same. I adjusted or have the shop adjusted my camera's meters so they read the same as my meters. So right or wrong I know what I am getting. I use them quite often but I do use the sunny 16 when I use a camera like the Minolta SRT-101 which requires mercury cell and even with Wein cell it's not accurate. Also I rather use the sunny 16 than using my old Weston Master II. I have the Weston just for fun I never use it.

 

[michaelbsc]

... Also I rather use the sunny 16 than using my old Weston Master II. I have the Weston just for fun I never use it.

I have a couple of Westons and find them to be accurate within their light sensitivity. They are useless for very low light.

 

[cliveh]

If you consistantly use the same film and developer/time, you don't need a light meter. Apart from studio work I haven't used one for for the past twenty years.

 

[benjiboy]

Really? Nobody else wants to comment on the irony here?

Apparently not.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I think Sunny 16 is a really good tool. It IS accurate. Nobody can argue that.

But at the same time - it doesn't really matter. If you have a way of shooting that works, whether it's with a meter or without - why would it matter, as long as you get what you want? And I'm a strong believer in repeatedly using the same thing, because practice makes perfect, not gadgets and gizmos, or the lack thereof.

 

[Diapositivo]

Learning to meter without light meter has its usefulness.

Imagine a situation when you are in the shade part of a street, the buildings behind you project a shade on you and your side of the street.
You want to take a picture of the other side of the road, a façade of a church in white marble kissed by the sun. The clouds play hide and seek with the sun, and you have to be fast if you want that light in your picture.

The user of "sunny 16" just select that exposure and he has a picture which is very probably quite right.

The user of a hand-held incident light meter must cross the road, measure the incident light, read that it is sunny 16, feel stupid for a moment, cross the road again, hope that in the meanwhile the light doesn't change. Crossing roads in Rome is not funny, motorists "don't take prisoners"

The user of a reflected light meter (whether in camera or hand-held) must measure the light on the other side of the road and then remember to compensate for the inevitable mistake that the reflected light meter will introduce when measuring a totally white object. The amount of compensation is always a bit puzzling as you have to "place" the white zone etc.

Which of the three methods is faster while guaranteeing an acceptable amount of precision? One can take a fast shot with sunny 16, seizing the moment and accepting the risk of a small exposure mistake, and then take the time for a measured and reasoned light reading for "fine tuning".

More in general the usefulness of the "sunny 16 rule" (or, let's say, choosing exposure by sight between LV 12 and 15) is that no light meter is accurate without a bit of reasoning, and as Benjiboy says "should be considered as a basis, in light of the photographers experience before making the exposure". That requires a bit of reasoning before making ANY exposure. The "sunny 16" can sometimes be just faster and more reliable.

In-camera meters are influenced by the background which changes continuously (dark or light, abundance of sky, relation sun-camera-photographer in backlit situations etc.) and can be definitely worse than using sunny 16.
Using an automatic camera will not solve the problem or can make it worse. Automatisms are only an emergency device.
As an example, while taking a subject which has a certain degree of back light during the central hours of the day, the "sunny 16" will suggest LV12 with a decently high degree of reliability while automatic exposure with a reflected light meter will be basically useless. Making a mental compensation to the automatic exposure is IMO less reliable than the sunny 16 rule.

"Matrix" metering introduces a random compensation based on what the camera thinks is the main subject. How is the camera supposed to know whether I want a silhouette of the "Petit Caporal" and have the background correctly exposed in this situation, or the statue correctly exposed and a burned background?

http://fineartamerica.com/featured/profile-of-an-emperor-fabrizio-ruggeri.html

How can a camera think in my stead? Matrix metering is the worse of the worse as I cannot even "compensate" it as I don't know what the camera choose as important. With sunny 16 one just chooses EV15 with a guarantee of a correct outer exposure, a correct silhouette of the statue, not much reasoning and predictable results. And no walking forth and back for measuring what light there is outside.

Learning to meter without meter can be precious especially for "street shooting" when there is no time to even look at the camera setting. You know that your camera is set at 1/125@f/11 (100 ISO). You see a subject standing in shade (EV 12). You turn your aperture ring 2 clicks more open, focus and shoot, mentally counting the aperture clicks, without looking at the values on the camera and without checking the in-camera instrument (which requires "reasoning", analysis of the background etc). Especially with B&W, street shooting can be just "turn 2.5 apertures more open in shade" and "turn 2.5 apertures closer" for sun, leaving the shutter speed fixed and operating the aperture ring with extreme ease and speed.

 

[Pioneer]

Learning to meter without light meter has its usefulness.

Learning to meter without meter can be precious especially for "street shooting" when there is no time to even look at the camera setting. You know that your camera is set at 1/125@f/11 (100 ISO). You see a subject standing in shade (EV 12). You turn your aperture ring 2 clicks more open, focus and shoot, mentally counting the aperture clicks, without looking at the values on the camera and without checking the in-camera instrument (which requires "reasoning", analysis of the background etc). Especially with B&W, street shooting can be just "turn 2.5 apertures more open in shade" and "turn 2.5 apertures closer" for sun, leaving the shutter speed fixed and operating the aperture ring with extreme ease and speed.

Ahh yess! The seemingly lost art of setting exposure as the camera comes to your eye.