The Overcast F5.6 Rule > For Color Print Film

[DF]

B&W photos on overcast days may have even lighting, but are flat and lifeless - but I'm thinking if they were color, there'd be just enough to put some life in them.
I'll be pointing at thick green growth and bark from forest floors mostly while leaving the sky portion out. Other scenes might be flower and garden beds.
Any recommendations at settings if one is using Kodak consumer 200, or maybe Ektar? I never use meters. Any good Fuji Color films?
Also, I want to use a Polarizer to eliminate glare to get the 'true' colors.

 

[foc]

Why don't you use a meter?
Especially if using a polarizer filter?
Is it not a bit hit and miss?
BTW I don't mean to be critical, I am a big fan of sunny 16 (or sunny 11 where I live) but I wouldn't trust it with a polarizer.

 

[brbo]

Why don't you use a meter?
Especially if using a polarizer filter?

I don't understand "especially with polarizer" part of your comment. As if all meters would greatly improve or make figuring out the exposure with polarizer that much easier. You'd basically want a ttl metered camera and a circular polarizer for that (none of which might be true in OP's case).

So, if your camera doesn't have a built-in ttl meter or you are using a linear polarizer, just establish how much light your polarizing filter is blocking (most filters will be within 1-1.5 stop) and use that with the sunny 16 rule. Kodak films will typically render greens slightly more towards yellow (consumer films even more so) and Fuji more towards blue. Fuji is currently basically not supplying any colour negative films so I'd use Kodak Ektar or Portra 160.

 

[grain elevator]

There's no way to guess the exposure for a forest floor. Tre cover density can vary wildly. Just use a meter!

 

[DF]

I've been using Sunny F16 under bright sunny skies with FP4 & PanF+ for years W/great results, but now it's overcast and color - but does it have to be a whole new ballgame? Yah - I'll add a stop and a half W/polarizer.

 

[Moose22]

Before I say anything, I don't care if you use a meter or not. Also, it's NOT a whole new ballgame. Unless you're shooting Velvia on a very contrasty scene or something. Portra 160 is ridiculously forgiving on highlights, you've got some range to work with.

But, I use a meter with a polarizer, even when I don't use a meter. By that, I shoot through the polarizer to get a feel for it, how much it really cuts and where. Then I just use that as a correction factor if I'm using the thing. I do that with my color filters for B&W too.

When I started back into film two years back I was into contrasty scenes. Landscapes, sunsets, reflections on water, using GNDs -- stupid hard to just "nail" every time and I had no through the lens metering. I pointed my meter everywhere, even if I wasn't shooting, just to get a sense of the range of the scene. After a while I could just take an incident reading as the light was dropping off and know all the rest.

You might do a similar thing. Use the meter where it's useful, then you'll be good and can leave it at home. Or just keep notes as you shoot and correct on the next roll if you're way off. I'm betting, with your experience, very little practice and you can nail overcast 5.6 way faster than I did.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Unfortunately there is no filter that takes out the overcast from the sky.