Why not incident?

[cyrus]

Can someone list the pros and cons of using an incident light meter for LF photography versus reflected/spot?

[Geert]

Well, I'm not a big fan of it, but think about applying the zone system wit an incident light meter.

G

[David A. Goldfarb]

I don't think there is any obvious connection between format and meter choice, except for the fact that it's easier to use the Zone System with sheet film, and the Zone System is generally conceived around spot metering.

For landscapes, a spot meter lets you know the reflectance of something far away and can take account of atmospheric haze and to measure the reflective contrast range of the actual objects in the scene.

It's not always easy to take an incident reading at the location of a distant object, but on the other hand, the light at the camera position may be the same as at the subject position, so then you can use an incident reading to know where to place Zone V, or you can use bright and shadow readings to determine the contrast range of the scene with the BTZS system.

Incident meters are handy in the studio, where the lights, camera, and subject are all close at hand. You can point the meter at different lights to determine the contrast range, and then use the domed diffuser on the meter pointed at the camera from the subject position to get a final exposure reading.

Any of these approaches applied thoughtfully can get you to the right exposure and contrast range.

[Alan Davenport]

The key word, already used in previous replies is, "thoughtful." There's really no reason not to use incident metering, but in doing so you must also mentally factor in the reflectivity of the subject and the contrast range of the scene. For "typical" landscapes (whatever those are) an incident reading will usually be fine. In fact, I usually take an incident reading after I have done my reflective readings and already calculated an exposure. The incident reading is never confused by shadows and highlights and tells me whether my chosen exposure is in the ballpark or if maybe I messed up somewhere (I know, it's hard to believe but it does happen.)

[GPS]

It's in no way an either - or choice. But there is an interesting element, not often mentioned - because during the incident metering you don't look through any eyepiece and you don't see exactly where you aime the meter then the spot metering easily allows you greater control over the process.

[Ed Richards]

I use incident metering exclusively for 4x5 black and white. I scan and print digitally, so I make no representations about whether my approach will work for silver. I know the Zone system and am old enough to also know that it was designed in great part to make up for the limitations of old films. Tmax in 1:3 Xtol has such great exposure latitude that you can you can use a modified zone system based on eyeballing the scene. If you need +1 or -1, do not worry about it, the film will work fine. If you need +2 or -2, change the exposure by a stop in the appropriate direction and up or decrease the developing. You should be able to look a scene and use techniques like shadowing the meter with your hand to figure out the range accurately enough for the latitude of the film. Really difficult lighting really needs a spot meter, but that is pretty rare. The worst I had recently was shooting into the interior of an old fort from outside in the blazing sun. I would have bracketed and gotten the shot, but as soon as the first shot was done, a grounds keep came by with a leaf blower and filled the space with dust.:-(

[Ken Lee]

Shooting in a studio, you can lay an incident meter on its back and take a reading, confident that middle gray will be rendered as middle gray.

However, you have no immediate way to know whether any high values will exceed the capacity of your film, or how dark the low values will be either.

The same can be said of a landscape scene such as this one, where there is a fairly small area in the distance, whose correct rendering is critical for the success of the image.

With a spot meter, such matters are instant and trivial. You directly measure the light reaching the camera. That's it. There's no need to run a mile to the barn on the hill, and take an incident reading.

[Leonard Evens]

For a well lit average outdoor scene with normal contrast, an incident light reading will be perfectly adequate. But in tricky circumstances or where there is high contrast in the scene, it is likely to result in underexposed shadows. The advantage of a spot meter is that you can from the camera position guage the values in the shadows and base the exposure on that. Remember the old admonition, expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights. The Zone System is just a quantified form of that rule.

I have a flashmeter which also functions both as a(non-spot) reflected light meter and an incident light meter. I sometimes take an incident light reading to check what I've decided on by using my spotmeter. The readings mostly agree, but sometimes there are significant differences, and the incident reading would lead to an underexposed negative.

[Bruce Watson]

Can someone list the pros and cons of using an incident light meter for LF photography versus reflected/spot?

It all comes down to finding a way to expose for the shadows. If you want shadow detail on the film, you have to give the film sufficient exposure. There's no way around this.

How you get there is an interesting question. There are methods of exposure that are built around incident meters, and methods built around spot meters. Any method, and any meter, that helps you gives your film sufficient exposure to carry the detail you want, is fine.

What you have to do is find a method with which you are comfortable. A method which gives you consistent and reproducible results. Most of us want a metering methodology that we can reduce to a simple quick set of steps so we can concentrate on the art, and not on the mechanics of metering.

So, none of us can tell you which method to use. What I think are pros and cons, you might think are cons and pros. That's because much of this is about how you think, and no two people think exactly the same way.

What I can tell you is that I personally use a spot meter to implement a modified zone system that works for me. With a spot meter I can quickly measure the various shadow areas of the scene I'm working and determine in seconds what my exposure is going to be. I find it quick, easy, intuitive, and very precise. You might find it awkward and slow, because YMMV.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

All it takes to use an incident meter is learning how to think differently about zones and how to use the meter. The BTZS method uses incident measurements and after using the zone system for many years I have found the incident method far more accurate. The only time I needed to use spot metering is when I was standing at the bottom of a valley unable to get out of the shadow.

If you use the BTZS the advantage is not only the calibration but that you only need to take 2 readings, shadow and light, unlike the zone system where for some reason most of us spend minutes taking different readings....