Why is no one making a modern comparison spot meter like the SIE Photometer or Ainger Hall meter?

[Helge]

It seems like very low hanging fruit.
The meter was always very simple in the basic construction and the advent of multicolour and white LEDs and drivers would make the issue of calibration nugatory.
The advantages of sensitivity and reading angle are there even after plus eighty years.

It would be obvious to combine it with range finding which could be accomplished simply by having the micro telescope project thorough a penta mirror and on to a projection screen. Fixing the reverse image "problem" too.

 

[albada]

I'd never heard of these meters, but a little search of the Internet turned up this interesting article about them:
The SEI Photometer -- A Legend Among Spot Meters

It occurred to me that people would need to compare the brightness of a white reference-spot with a colored spot in the scene, which would reduce accuracy.
I think a modern version of such a meter could eliminate the neutral density filters by varying the brightness of the reference-spot (using a LED) instead of that of the scene.

 

[faberryman]

How much would it cost to make? How many people would buy it?

 

[Steven Lee]

@Helge every time you hear "Why is no one making X?" the answer is usually that those who can have something more lucrative to work on. Not to get into controversial topics here, but the world is constantly struggling with talent shortage. Only a tiny fraction of the population is productive.

 

[Helge]

I'd never heard of these meters, but a little search of the Internet turned up this interesting article about them:
The SEI Photometer -- A Legend Among Spot Meters

It occurred to me that people would need to compare the brightness of a white reference-spot with a colored spot in the scene, which would reduce accuracy.
I think a modern version of such a meter could eliminate the neutral density filters by varying the brightness of the reference-spot (using a LED) instead of that of the scene.

It’s basically the most precise, sensitive and largest EI range spot meter ever sold.
With superb close focus range too.
It’s still used by people in the know and need.
It’s that good.

The colour problem was never big to start with.
The human eye is much more sensitive to luminance. Anyway it did not affect the precision of the famous meter.
In the SEI version it’s was compensated for with two coloured filters (daylight and indoors).
Today you could of course do much better with multi colour LEDs, which would bring in the possibility of a colour spot meter, which would be bonkers (in a good way). But of course would need an extra dial.

How much would it cost to make? How many people would buy it?

It’s basically a flashlight and a simple scope. Anyone can make it and it would be useable for anyone who needs a light meter.

@Helge every time you hear "Why is no one making X?" the answer is usually that those who can have something more lucrative to work on. Not to get into controversial topics here, but the world is constantly struggling with talent shortage. Only a tiny fraction of the population is productive.

Someone like Cameradactyl makes more complex stuff constantly. All the recent shoemount meters are also hugely more complex and risky to manufacture.
It would be totally doable in some version.

 

[pentaxuser]

It’s basically a flashlight and a simple scope. Anyone can make it and it would be useable for anyone who needs a light meter.


Someone like Cameradactyl makes more complex stuff constantly.
It would be totally doable in some version.

Any thoughts about asking Cameradactyl or others in the meter business to consider making one?

pentaxuser

 

[Helge]

Any thoughts about asking Cameradactyl or others in the meter business to consider making one?

pentaxuser

Hence this thread.
These pages are read far more intentively by industry insiders and movers and shakers than one would suppose.

 

[Bill Burk]

They come up on eBay occasionally and they are not very expensive when they do. There is a risk that it may take three to make one good one.

I have one that very nearly calibrates.

The first one I got had a bad selenium cell and the spot was slightly desilvered. The second one had a rotted battery compartment and poor grayscale and wrinkled filters. But the prism was good. The third one had a nearly good selenium cell.

To be fair, I wasn’t afraid to buy the ugly ones.

 

[pentaxuser]

Hence this thread.
These pages are read far more intentively by industry insiders and movers and shakers than one would suppose.

My impression is that if industry insiders and movers and shakers were to read this thread, they may not detect a lot of enthusiasm, other than yours for a resurrection of the SE1. so therein lies the problem or so it seems to me

I just thought that if you were to convey all of your enthusiasm to some of the industry insiders and movers and shakers in the form of a request/proposal they might give you an answer as to whether they consider this resurrection of the SE1 to be a viable business proposition

pentaxuser

 

[Bill Burk]

If it can be built with a Raspberry Pi and 3D printer, you may be surprised how possible it might be.

Getting ahold of good continuous-tone grayscales may be an issue. But we know Kodak TMAX 100 has a good long straight line section.

 

[flavio81]

It seems like very low hanging fruit.
The meter was always very simple in the basic construction and the advent of multicolour and white LEDs and drivers would make the issue of calibration nugatory.
The advantages of sensitivity and reading angle are there even after plus eighty years.

It would be obvious to combine it with range finding which could be accomplished simply by having the micro telescope project thorough a penta mirror and on to a projection screen. Fixing the reverse image "problem" too.

The SEI meter you describe is a comparison meter, technology that has been largely superseded by meters that directly measure the light instead of relying on the eye (like extintion meters)

 

[Helge]

The SEI meter you describe is a comparison meter, technology that has been largely superseded by meters that directly measure the light instead of relying on the eye (like extintion meters)

No they haven’t.
Comparison meters, like the SEI are has range, sensitivity, unrivaled narrow reading area and close focus not even close to being outdone by any modern a meter.

They have a few quirks, like reverse image in finder (like all telescopes) and the calibration needed with a filament bulb.
But both of those would be easy to fix with a simple penta mirror box and a LED source.

They would be exceptionally simple and cheap to make today.

 

[Helge]

My impression is that if industry insiders and movers and shakers were to read this thread, they may not detect a lot of enthusiasm, other than yours for a resurrection of the SE1. so therein lies the problem or so it seems to me

I just thought that if you were to convey all of your enthusiasm to some of the industry insiders and movers and shakers in the form of a request/proposal they might give you an answer as to whether they consider this resurrection of the SE1 to be a viable business proposition

pentaxuser

If they don’t have the imagination, curiosity and knowledge to see that this is a good idea and big niche, then they probably wouldn’t be a good candidate to make it.
I don’t have the time or want to do a real fully fledged pitch. That’s a big job for very little or no gain.
It’s often much better to make people feel they half discovered something themselves instead of serving them a pre-chewed idea on a silver platter. They don’t feel it’s theirs that way.

Fact of the matter is a good comparison meter released today with todays LED tech would wipe the floor with any currently sold meter.
Both in absolute terms and in superb price to performance ratio.

 

[pentaxuser]

With the amount of thought, diagrams etc you have on this it would seem that potential makers, movers and shakers would have to give any proposal you make serious consideration. Of course if they don't qualify as true movers and shakers as is hinted at in your first sentence then you may have to resign yourself to being the one believer "raging against the dying of the light" but who is unable to prevent a darkness descending on a photographic world of unbelievers

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

I had and used for a while a Gossen meter that worked this way.
I found it awkward to use, so IIRC I gave it to someone who lacked a meter and wanted to experiment with it.

 

[Helge]

With the amount of thought, diagrams etc you have on this it would seem that potential makers, movers and shakers would have to give any proposal you make serious consideration. Of course if they don't qualify as true movers and shakers as is hinted at in your first sentence then you may have to resign yourself to being the one believer "raging against the dying of the light" but who is unable to prevent a darkness descending on a photographic world of unbelievers

pentaxuser

Are taking the piss?

I had and used for a while a Gossen meter that worked this way.
I found it awkward to use, so IIRC I gave it to someone who lacked a meter and wanted to experiment with it.

What Gossen was that?

 

[MattKing]

What Gossen was that?

An old one - IIRC it was relatively large, and took a largish battery that wasn't easily found - but it was a long time ago.
EDIT: After some Googling I realize now that it was a Gossen Variosix/Polysix/Multibeam Electronic.
A little bit different from what you are talking about, but there are some commonalities.
http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Gossen_Variosix

 

[pentaxuser]

Are taking the piss?

No. It seemed to me that you were so convinced that it was a great idea and a viable one that if it were me I'd write to those whom you believe can make things happen in terms of taking an idea to production. Such persons are unlikely to be here or if they are then they remain in the shadows as far as I can see. Unless some such person on Photrio has contacted you privately via PM?

If on the other hand your objective was simply to make your views known in a strong manner for the purposes of generating a debate of point and counter point on Photrio then I think you have succeeded already


pentaxuser

 

[Helge]

An old one - IIRC it was relatively large, and took a largish battery that wasn't easily found - but it was a long time ago.
EDIT: After some Googling I realize now that it was a Gossen Variosix/Polysix/Multibeam Electronic.
A little bit different from what you are talking about, but there are some commonalities.
http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Gossen_Variosix

Sorry not the same thing.
At all.
It’s a bog standard spot meter.

No. It seemed to me that you were so convinced that it was a great idea and a viable one that if it were me I'd write to those whom you believe can make things happen in terms of taking an idea to production. Such persons are unlikely to be here or if they are then they remain in the shadows as far as I can see. Unless some such person on Photrio has contacted you privately via PM?

If on the other hand your objective was simply to make your views known in a strong manner for the purposes of generating a debate of point and counter point on Photrio then I think you have succeeded already


pentaxuser

My aim was partly to entice and enlighten anyone with connections or direct ability to initiate manufacture of such a device.
There is a lot of lurkers on here.

And partly to get to hear others experiences and knowledge of other such meters and if, even if at a far stretch, someone was actually doing the proposed idea already.

 

[MattKing]

Sorry not the same thing.
At all.
It’s a bog standard spot meter.

Yes, but it does require you to visually match the appearance of two lights, which is why I didn't really like it.
It is the visual matching part that concerned me.

 

[pentaxuser]

My aim was partly to entice and enlighten anyone with connections or direct ability to initiate manufacture of such a device.
There is a lot of lurkers on here.

And partly to get to hear others experiences and knowledge of other such meters and if, even if at a far stretch, someone was actually doing the proposed idea already.

Do you believe that you have succeeded in your objective in the first 2 sentences? If on hearing others' experiences and knowledge of such meters which have been given by them then that knowledge suggests to me that there is little enthusiasm for resurrection of the SE1 so do you believe resurrection still has a future?

Finally any signs that someone was actually doing the proposed idea already?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Helge]

Do you believe that you have succeeded in your objective in the first 2 sentences? If on hearing others' experiences and knowledge of such meters which have been given by them then that knowledge suggests to me that there is little enthusiasm for resurrection of the SE1 so do you believe resurrection still has a future?

Finally any signs that someone was actually doing the proposed idea already?

Thanks

pentaxuser

It seems only Bill Burke had tried one. Ish.
The problem with this kind of meter was always calibration. That would not be an issue with a LED source. And LEDs would greatly simplify and lighten (sic) the design.
I have no idea who reads this thread or who is enthusiastic. It will pop up for years in searches, and that is where it will do its work. Who reads it now and how they reply is of lesser significance.

Yes, but it does require you to visually match the appearance of two lights, which is why I didn't really like it.
It is the visual matching part that concerned me.

This

is completely different from this

It makes a world of difference whether the lights are completely adjacent to each other, touching, or with a border between.
The human eye has pretty terrible absolute ability to gauge light levels and differences, but with relative contrast differences it is very good, especially with completely adjacent fields, and with superb range too.

That said, I have no trouble seeing the point of null with the lights. It would have been much better if they where touching though.

There is also a huge difference between a meter where there is a clear divide between detector and display, like other null meters such as Luna-Pro F and the directly read meters such as the SEI, where detector and readout is one and the same.
Separate display meters tend to give a false sense of certainty and absoluteness. Something antithetical to the actual act of metering light for photography. You might actually end up with worse results, especially with unforgiving film if you take such a reading as gospel.

 

[MattKing]

The two lights in the Polysix are pretty close to each other, but I take your point. I did like the viewing part of the Polysix - much more dependable that having to estimate where it was pointing to.