Using an external meter by choice

[Paul Howell]

Is there any point to the zone system if you print from the digital scan. For BW? For color?

This is a hybrid discussion, although not allowed, but, I think so, although you can in post you use plug ins that allow you to place high lights and shadows in any zone, if you did not get shadow detail or totally blew the highlights they cannot be fixed. To get the most out of the zone you need to shoot sheet film as each exposure is given a different time to place the highlight in your visualized zone. When I shoot zone and roll film I meter every exposure for zone 3, shadow with detail, and develop for zone VII highlights with texture and let the dark shadows and valueless highlights fall where they may.

For color, Carson Graves has a chapter on how to use the zone system with color in The Zone System for 35mm Photographers.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is there any point to the zone system if you print from the digital scan. For BW? For color?

Yes, if the shadow details do not show up in the film or digital photograph, there is no magic wand that will bring those details back. The exposure needs to be there either via the Zone System or buy lowering the ISO by a 0.5 to 1.0 f/stop.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Yes, if the shadow details do not show up in the film or digital photograph, there is no magic wand that will bring those details back. The exposure needs to be there either via the Zone System or buy lowering the ISO by a 0.5 to 1.0 f/stop.

What I've been doing is getting my histogram in range so it's not clipping at either end. (I started using a digital camera as a light meter). Then for BW film I raise the exposure by about 1/2 stop to pick up more shadow details as long as I'm not clipping the highlights.

With chromes, I do the opposite lowering the exposure so I don't clip the highlights.

Of course, if the range is way beyond the histogram like you get with sunny skies, I might need a graduated ND filter to keep everything in range.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The fallacy I see in my method is that the digital camera's range of stops is greater than my film. So where it clips would be incorrectly shown. But I'm figuring that's really no different than a handheld meter using reflective readings. So as long as the "average" reading is in the middle, a little 1/2 stop adjustment should work. Does anyone have any comments on this or ideas?

 

[Sirius Glass]

What I've been doing is getting my histogram in range so it's not clipping at either end. (I started using a digital camera as a light meter). Then for BW film I raise the exposure by about 1/2 stop to pick up more shadow details as long as I'm not clipping the highlights.

With chromes, I do the opposite lowering the exposure so I don't clip the highlights.

Of course, if the range is way beyond the histogram like you get with sunny skies, I might need a graduated ND filter to keep everything in range.

The fallacy I see in my method is that the digital camera's range of stops is greater than my film. So where it clips would be incorrectly shown. But I'm figuring that's really no different than a handheld meter using reflective readings. So as long as the "average" reading is in the middle, a little 1/2 stop adjustment should work. Does anyone have any comments on this or ideas?

Yes, use film. Your life will be better and easier to understand.

 

[BradS]

What I've been doing is getting my histogram in range so it's not clipping at either end. (I started using a digital camera as a light meter). Then for BW film I raise the exposure by about 1/2 stop to pick up more shadow details as long as I'm not clipping the highlights.

With chromes, I do the opposite lowering the exposure so I don't clip the highlights.

Of course, if the range is way beyond the histogram like you get with sunny skies, I might need a graduated ND filter to keep everything in range.

The fallacy I see in my method is that the digital camera's range of stops is greater than my film. So where it clips would be incorrectly shown. But I'm figuring that's really no different than a handheld meter using reflective readings. So as long as the "average" reading is in the middle, a little 1/2 stop adjustment should work. Does anyone have any comments on this or ideas?

This is an analog ONLY area. Please refrain from the digital discussion or take it to a more appropriate area. It's about having respect for others.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Yes, use film. Your life will be better and easier to understand.

I am talking about film. I'm using the digital camera as the meter but I'm still shooting film with a film camera

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

This is an analog ONLY area. Please refrain from the digital discussion or take it to a more appropriate area. It's about having respect for others.

I am shooting film. Please see my last post. Hand held meters are often digital especially spot meters and no different than using a digital camera as a meter.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am talking about film. I'm using the digital camera as the meter but I'm still shooting film with a film camera

So there is still hope for you. Since I do not have a digital camera that I can use to check out ideas or use to test, I am refraining from commenting on the use of a digital camera as a light meter with your particular technique.

 

[BradS]

I am shooting film. Please see my last post. Hand held meters are often digital especially spot meters and no different than using a digital camera as a meter.

The discussion sounds a lot different. Please consider starting a new thread in a more appropriate area, with the hybrid box checked. Perhaps, under the "Exposure Discussion" sub forum, again, with the hybrid box checked.

https://www.photrio.com/forum/forums/exposure-discussion.32/

 

[BrianShaw]

Call your exposure analysis method/tool an optical spectrum analysis, Alan…

 

[drmoss_ca]

I don't think it needs a new thread, necessarily, unless we are to slavishly obey some arbitrary rules. I have used a Canon G9 as a meter for a Hasselblad, principally because the LCD on the back showed the final image and allowed adjustments of over or under exposure that would change the LCD image. It did not work as well as an ordinary incident meter, so I no longer do it. Yes, I know I have just made an unfair comparison - reflective versus incident, and maybe the G9 would be an excellent way of reflective metering, but be that as it may, what I want is the best way of metering for my film Hasselblads, or Olympus Pen cameras, or the 4x5. So far, the best thing I have come up with is an incident meter (maybe I still need an indecent meter!), despite my best efforts with spotmeters and the zone system. Perhaps I'm too stupid to make that work, or maybe the system itself isn't as good as an accurate incident meter?

 

[BradS]

Call your exposure analysis method/tool an optical spectrum analysis, Alan…

Yup, that would work too. Just leave out all the digital camera crap...and scanning and inject printing crap too. That's all more appropriately discussed under the hybrid area.

EDIT: Except that it's not really a spectrum analyzer.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The discussion sounds a lot different. Please consider starting a new thread in a more appropriate area, with the hybrid box checked. Perhaps, under the "Exposure Discussion" sub forum, again, with the hybrid box checked.

https://www.photrio.com/forum/forums/exposure-discussion.32/

Done. Thank you.
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/using-a-digital-camera-as-a-light-meter-to-shoot-film.189162/

 

[BradS]

Done. Thank you.
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/using-a-digital-camera-as-a-light-meter-to-shoot-film.189162/

Thank you for your kindness Alan.

 

[drmoss_ca]

There goes the neighbourhood.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I don't think it needs a new thread, necessarily, unless we are to slavishly obey some arbitrary rules. I have used a Canon G9 as a meter for a Hasselblad, principally because the LCD on the back showed the final image and allowed adjustments of over or under exposure that would change the LCD image. It did not work as well as an ordinary incident meter, so I no longer do it. Yes, I know I have just made an unfair comparison - reflective versus incident, and maybe the G9 would be an excellent way of reflective metering, but be that as it may, what I want is the best way of metering for my film Hasselblads, or Olympus Pen cameras, or the 4x5. So far, the best thing I have come up with is an incident meter (maybe I still need an indecent meter!), despite my best efforts with spotmeters and the zone system. Perhaps I'm too stupid to make that work, or maybe the system itself isn't as good as an accurate incident meter?

Thanks for your input. But I did start a separate thread to focus on my questions. Maybe you can add your comments there as well.
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/using-a-digital-camera-as-a-light-meter-to-shoot-film.189162/

 

[BrianShaw]

There goes the neighbourhood.

… and the neighborhood with it.

 

[Craig75]

This is an analog ONLY area. Please refrain from the digital discussion or take it to a more appropriate area. It's about having respect for others.

Absolutely gruelling.

 

[BradS]

Absolutely gruelling.

Maybe so. The good part is that now this interesting topic of discussion has its own thread where can be fully and directly discussed comfortably.

 

[Bill Burk]

I mentioned this several times already didn’t I?

Spotmeter (Zone System): set EI at 2/3 stop slower than ISO
Incident meter: set at ISO

Take relevant reading depending on the situation. Use both meters if you have time and feel so inclined. (100 sheets of film sounds like a lot until you are on a 10-day excursion where it becomes 10 shots a day).

When they don’t agree, use the settings that will give you a better negative if conditions allow you to use those settings (if you are handholding in low light you might choose the faster settings).

What I like about this is that it gives me “correct” exposure. If I think it’s still too slow a shutter speed I can still decide to select a higher speed and know how many stops I am pushing it (1 stop is easily held by film, 2 stops or more and it turns the photo into a graphic arts exercise or a record shot).

 

[MattKing]

FWIW:
Alan's question isn't a problem in this sub-forum. Digital "capture" and digital post-processing and digital printing aren't allowed, but you can talk about your latest edition, digital whiz bang exposure meter in an appropriately related to film thread here, if you should so desire.
Alan's question is a problem for this thread - because it is sufficiently off topic for the thread as to need a new thread instead - thanks Alan.
But the "Exposure Discussion" sub-forum (which is what Alan chose for his new thread) is certainly well suited for that thread, and arguably appropriate for this one as well.
And for clarity - there is nothing wrong with any of the discussion here, just as there is nothing wrong with asking that some of it be moved to a different part of this structured according to subject website.

 

[Pieter12]

So in the analog only section, no discussion of digital light meters is allowed? That pretty much limits it to the little Sekonics and a Gossen, and out-of-production hand-held meters. Even film cameras have digital meters now, and have for a while.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

FWIW:
Alan's question isn't a problem in this sub-forum. Digital "capture" and digital post-processing and digital printing aren't allowed, but you can talk about your latest edition, digital whiz bang exposure meter in an appropriately related to film thread here, if you should so desire.
Alan's question is a problem for this thread - because it is sufficiently off topic for the thread as to need a new thread instead - thanks Alan.
But the "Exposure Discussion" sub-forum (which is what Alan chose for his new thread) is certainly well suited for that thread, and arguably appropriate for this one as well.
And for clarity - there is nothing wrong with any of the discussion here, just as there is nothing wrong with asking that some of it be moved to a different part of this structured according to subject website.

I understood these points after calming down. That's why I decided to create a separate thread and not argue as I was originally going too Yours was a good idea. Thanks.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

So in the analog only section, no discussion of digital light meters is allowed? That pretty much limits it to the little Sekonics and a Gossen, and out-of-production hand-held meters. Even film cameras have digital meters now, and have for a while.

No Pieter, Matt says you can discuss digital meters in the analog section.

From his post: Digital "capture" and digital post-processing and digital printing aren't allowed, but you can talk about your latest edition, digital whiz bang exposure meter in an appropriately related to film thread here, if you should so desire.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you find somebody who is still doing this, can you please share that info with us? I have 2 meters that need to be calibrated.
Thanks...

Most DPs seem to use Spectra meters. I think they're still in buisness and will calibrate theirs and other meters. But since they could be the only source now, they might be extremely busy.

I called Samy's on Fairfax and they said for most older light meters they recommend Spectra City Meter Repair. Others they send to the manufacturers, but be sure to contact the repair place or Samy's first.