One Chrome Only, best exposure method

[Frank Petronio]

So, if you were going out with only one sheet of color transparency film and you had to get the exposure right the first time -- no testing -- and it was a "normal" landscape scene with no extremes -- and you had to choose between the following metering methods:

1. Using a DSLR at the same aperture, speed, and ISO to determine the exposure that produces a centered, well balanced histogram.

OR

2. Using a spot meter to place the highlights on Zone 6.5 to 8, (or place the midtones on Zone 5) depending on your film, subject and past experience.

OR

3. Holding your incident meter in the light and using it as a basis for going with what feels right based on your experience and intuition ....

Which would you do and why?

[Kirk Gittings]

Meter off the small grey card that I always have with me in the same light of the subject. Place on Zone V.

[David A. Goldfarb]

For color slide, landscape, I'd use method 2, usually putting the highlight on zone 6.5, because if the highlights are lost they're lost, and if the midtones are a little under, that's not necessarily a bad thing. If the light is flat, I might push 1 stop.

[Ralph Barker]

I typically cross-check between methods 2 and 3, then lean toward #2 to give the desired precedence to highlights or shadows. Unless you'e in rapidly changing light, it never hurts to double-check readings.

[Will Strain]

#2 - because I don't have to worry about any inconsistency between actual film speed and the ISO that my camera reads (unless I had spent some time to calibrate, and knew how close it was)

Also because of my familiarity with the spot meter in general. I understand what its doing and why I'm metering what I am.

And because I'm a control freaq.

[Donald Qualls]

I'd probably use the incident meter, since I don't own either a DSLR or a spotmeter anyway (but I'd most likely also meter the scene in reflected light by the "Edward Weston method" -- Ansel Adams described it as waving the meter around the scene, muttering to himself, and then setting the exposure).

[Peter Galea]

So, I would meter for the highlight. Somewhere between the sky and midtone. Prolly read back and forth between. Then average and guess.
BUT....I would seriously question going out with ONLY one sheet of transperency film......I mean , like why not shoot both sides of the holder?

[Ed K.]

Hi Frank,

1,2 & 3 all have their place in a way. People do shoot Polaroids, so when belows factor is not an issue, a DSLR provides a nice "reasonableness" check as well as a reference shot to compare how developing went later on. This assumes you have a DSLR with you. I use #1 from time to time - it is a nice way to double check.

I don't know about zone system with color slides, however depending upon the important part of ths subject, most spot meters automatically place a highlight or shadow, or average readings as you like, depending upon what buttons you use. As it is usually not desireable for blown highlights in a slide, in an area that you think should show detail, then meter for the highlight and add a couple of stops ( meters do this for you.. the H button on a Spotmeter F ). If the shadow is more important, go for that, or compromise by averaging the parts of the scene you need detail in. So if #2 means "use a spotmeter", that is often the most deliberate way to get results that match your interpretation of the scene, provided you've practiced with it and know what to meter. You can try metering for your DSLR with your hand-held spot and work out a routine that is quite reliable with out buring up a bunch of film. Then take your technique to the film and tweak from there. A gray card is always handy, even with a spot meter to take what is nearly an incident reading.

Incident meters work great for landscape, as subject color doesn't affect them. The trouble is, if you're up in the mountains, and some more distant part of the scene is important - and - it's a nice clear mountain afternoon - what seems like the same light falling on you may in fact not be the same. Mountain light can be tricky that way - the air is so clear sometimes and snow reflects too. Generally, an incident meter is reliable and easy to use.

The good part is that there are combined spot and incident meters. While I don't use the Zone system with color slides, I get good results with spot when its tricky, incident when in a hurry or when I'm pretty sure what's falling on the meter is what falls on the subject.

While sort of "unpure", it doesn't hurt to take a DSLR shot if you've got one layin' around. The DSLR also does a nice job of recording the exposure data if you shoot it manually and the same as the film ( doesn't work for closeups or filters very well, especially polarizing filters! ). The bad part about DSLR is that it is a brain drainer, it tends to help one forget something in the LF part. Histograms alone can be deceiving too, but of course you can "chimp" with the little LCD a bit if yours is accurate. The digital shot can be a nice reference to check against uneven film development too - a cheap reference for when you get your film back from the lab or pull it from your processor.

Often, even the "perfect" exposure can look good with more or less development, or exposure too. If you shoot the same shot, one on each side of the holder, you can tell the lab to run one so that you can judge it and then run the other. This helps because you might want a tad more contrast with a slight push, or perhaps less contrast and a bit darker with a little pull. Even a 1/3rd makes a difference. Also, I find that the second shot helps in case the lab munches it, or also in case a little wind movement, etc. comes in. Film is cheap compared to getting out to that great scene.

If I had to pack down to a "less is more" setup, I'd take another film holder instead of the DSLR. I don't know if I could choose between only a spot or only an incident meter, however 60/40, I'd take the spot meter if I could only have one, and then keep a small gray card in my pocket ( I do ).

It all depends on your subject, and your willingness to carry a lot of equipment. Whatever lets you bring back the great scene is a great way to do it.

[ronald moravec]

Incident meter is first choice

Number two is a reflection reading off the palm of my hand and give one stop more.

3 is an overall reflecton.

4 is spot meter of known middle grey objects like the bottom of cumulus clouds, spring grass. Or spot a tree trunk and put it one stop less than grey.

Importanly you need to know all the shutter speeds are correct.

[phil sweeney]

Hi Frank,

For me normal is zone 4 through 7 for transparencies. On the rare occasion I shoot a transparency its a one shot deal, after I am done with the B/W film. Place the important highlight on Zone 7. Its never let me down. If there is a lot of detail on zone 3 it ain't normal and we pack it up!

[Eric Leppanen]

If the sun is behind you, then an incident meter should be spot on. If the sunlight is coming in laterally, then positioning the incident meter versus the camera to get a proper reading becomes tricky, and where possible I would prefer to spot meter on a grey card (placed at Zone V). Otherwise spot meter on a color or tone in the scene which has a known Zone placement (if possible use multiple readings on different points for placement confirmation), and use this as the basis for your exposure.

A DSLR can work too, but I have found that the color sensitivity of the DSLR sensor may differ somewhat from film, and therefore a "good" histogram may not always reflect an optimal film exposure. If the scene being photographed has varied colors, then this should not be a problem; but if it has a few dominant colors then a dedicated film exposure meter is safer IMHO.

Even with all this, I still prefer to shoot at least two sheets of chrome film per scene, pushing or pulling the second sheet depending on how the first sheet turns out. Bracketing is even better. Why take the risk of only shooting one sheet?

[Bill_1856]

Shoot it with the DSLR, bracketing the exposure by 1/3, just like I did for 50 years with Kodachrome. For me, sheet film is only B&W.

[Frank Petronio]

I'm only asking because I am thinking of doing a project with 8x10 with "one-off" chromes being a restraining factor / exercise. No scanning, no digitalosis, just one shot and hung in a light box. Like a Dogma film maker. That they would be of people, usually moving, makes it all the more of a one-shot deal.

In the past I always shot plenty of 4x5 brackets and used a spot meter to place the highlights. I will probably use a DSLR as a compostion and testing tool rather than Polaroids, and it'd be foolish not to at least peak at the histrograms....

[Clay Turtle]

Do just that a lot of the time and I seem to have an aversion against bracketing ( but I am working on this fault). I use a spot meter, I meter the scene ( hi & low, and points in the between) then avg. meter the scene which I follow up with spotting a little grey card I carry. Entering all this data into the log, I ask what is the subject then select my exposure & wonder how much has the light changed since I metered the scene?

If I bracketed I would probably get better results but so I far I get good shots, maybe not the best but at least consistancy in exposure (results).

[Scott Fleming]

I spot meter the highlight through my neutral density graduated filter and mash the H button on my Minolta spot meter. Works great.

[Colin Robertson]

So- big camera, moving people, one shot only. Wow. What a hard-core test of ability. If the light is fairly constant I'd use Incident metering. It's such an under-valued tool. First, it's very dependable and hard to fool. Secondly, it's easy- and frees you up to concentrate more on the subject. The portraits on your web site are great (esp flag series) but static. To catch the moment on 10x8 you probably need to remove as many distractions as possible between you and the subject. Take a reading, set exposure, forget. Re-checking if the light changes is faster than taking several spot readings and missing the shot whilst doing mental gymnastics. Best of luck.

[Dan Fromm]

Hmm. I have nothing that's exactly directly comparable, but I do a bit of macro work with a Nikon. Haven't run out of KM yet, so that's what I use. All flash, with a pre-calibrated flash rig. Select magnfication to suit subject and desired framing, look up the right aperture on the rig's aperture vs. magnification table. Adjust aperture as much as 1/2 stop for especially reflective or dark subjects. Focus, compose, shoot. Often take just one shot, almost always nail it.

What I've described above is equivalent to metering incident. If I used TTL autoflash (foul! unclean! abomination!) I'd be metering reflected.