Does anyone use a DSLR for test shots?

[rustyair]

I drove an hour on very foggy morning. Took 4 4x5 films and don't like them much. I'm thinking of getting a cheap mirrorless camera for perfect f stops and shutter speed. Does anyone using a dslr/mirrorless for test shots? Thanks,

[TheDeardorffGuy]

see this


http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?93369-Large-format-photography-with-Nikon-D800

[cosmicexplosion]

i was just reading the negative by A.A and he was talking about the benifits of polaroid to check on things. even composition and the general mass of black white and grey.
so a digital could be the new free to run polaroid, just chuck it in B+W mode and away you go.
i have an old digital i have to retrieve from a mate, and intend to give it a crack.
i am not sure how a 35mm translates to 8x10
in the sense of using a light meter.
ie
the light meter always gives me an underexposed image if i take it literally, (810) so as i have now taken dozens of underexposed images
i am now giving it 2-3 moe stops
i have just done a weekend shoot
in the suthern highlands nsw
so will see how it goes

ultimatly i lik eth e idea of just knowing what the hell your doing so you dont need more than you need.
camera lens lightmeter film darkcloth
not even sure if a loup is really needed

AA was talking about certyain filters that even out the colours to give you a better grip on things, also sqwinting your eyes to see the general mass of shapes and tones

a filter and a sqwuint is cheeper than a camera.
A

[Cletus]

I've tried this before in the pre-digital era, in the days before I understood how to use (or even owned) a light meter. I had just got my first Hasselblad and was using my Nikon F100 for the meter. It isn't very reliable and I learned that even the best in-camera evaluative metering isn't a better judge of exposure than your brain and a spot meter. Fog is one of my favorites too, although it and can also make it pretty tough to meter a scene properly.

Either way, you would be well advised to practice with your meter and learn to expose your film based on how you want the individual image to look. You will always be able to do better using your brain and a good spotmeter than any in-camera meter that is unable to think, or judge which areas of the scene should receive what exposure. Even if you're not a strict zone system user, you should still follow the "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" rule of thumb, as a fairly reliable way to get a full range negative with all necessary tones preserved for printing.

BTW - The above remarks are most applicable to conventional black and white film that you are processing yourself. Color negative film is a little more sensitive to exposure and color transparency is critically so. It still doesn't negate the fact that the photographer with a good spot meter who is knowledgeable and practiced in his craft will almost always outwit the built-in automated exposure system in any camera.

The exception to all this is the studio photographer using strobes and working with film. In that case, using a digital camera as a "Polaroid" test to verify lighting ratios and effects and to judge exposure is common practice. Just make sure if you plan to use this method, your digital camera has a hotshoe, or some other means to sync to the power pack or strobe heads.

[Lachlan 717]

You probably won't be comparing the same dynamic range when you use digital capture. This will cause you some issues.

One useful feature on digitals, though, is the Highlight view (the one that flashes when you blow the highlights). This can be used to work out the brightest parts of a scene, allowing you to work out your development compensation regime/Zone System. This, of course, is predicated on your use of such a regime...

[Kodachrome25]

I use Viewfinder Pro on my iPhone to pre-visualize what lens to use. Then I use Lightmeter on the phone if I need a spot meter. Other than that, my D800 stays home, I can shoot film in my sleep....

[John Olsen]

I bought a Nikon D90, mostly for this purpose. The main problem is the interpretation of the LCD image. It's way too bright for whatever ISO you've set. I have set the display at a -1 intensity and it still is too bright. About another 1/2 stop of light is required for a good film exposure compared to the D90. With experience you can make this adaptation, just as you would have with Polaroid test images in the good old days.

An additional problem can come from evaluating to LCD brightness in either too dark, or too bright an area. If you look at the LCD out in full sunlight, you'll end up grossly overexposing your film. Likewise, if your shooting environment is dark, the LCD will seem really bright and you'll choose film exposures that are badly underexposed.

Overall, the digital camera is a great tool for quick proofing of exposures. In studio shots I don't even bother with using a flash meter, because the D90 will walk me in to a good exposure so quickly. But experiment with LCD evaluation a lot before depending on it to guide your film exposures..

[womble]

I bought a Nikon D90, mostly for this purpose. The main problem is the interpretation of the LCD image. It's way too bright for whatever ISO you've set. I have set the display at a -1 intensity and it still is too bright. About another 1/2 stop of light is required for a good film exposure compared to the D90. With experience you can make this adaptation, just as you would have with Polaroid test images in the good old days.

An additional problem can come from evaluating to LCD brightness in either too dark, or too bright an area. If you look at the LCD out in full sunlight, you'll end up grossly overexposing your film. Likewise, if your shooting environment is dark, the LCD will seem really bright and you'll choose film exposures that are badly underexposed.

Overall, the digital camera is a great tool for quick proofing of exposures. In studio shots I don't even bother with using a flash meter, because the D90 will walk me in to a good exposure so quickly. But experiment with LCD evaluation a lot before depending on it to guide your film exposures..

Don't attempt to assess the quality of a digital exposure using the LCD image, it will just be misleading. Use the histogram function to see the range of tones and whether or not some pixels are blown or not. One problem with using digital as a preview format for film is the linear response curve of a digital sensor compared to the S-shaped curve for film. In essence, we get more information in the "tails". Having said that, the dynamic range of digital sensors is improving rapidly these days.

HTH, Kris.

[cosmicexplosion]

I use Viewfinder Pro on my iPhone to pre-visualize what lens to use. Then I use Lightmeter on the phone if I need a spot meter. Other than that, my D800 stays home, I can shoot film in my sleep....


great answers , i have been thinking about this my self, but i like this attitude of kodachrome, as he clearly has it nailed, which is where you want to be, an i mean when you think about it, you usually only need to make a choice of a range of 2-3 f/stops.

then again, its only 5 numbers to win the lotto.

surely being a pro, is just a case of hazarding an educated guess?

and that the key is experience?

so like Jimmi hendrix said "Are you experienced?"

[Noah A]

I use a point & shoot digicam or, more frequently, viewfinder pro on the iPhone, but honestly I use those tools more to keep track of what I've shot than to really act as a preview. A DSLR is a bit bulky to use just for tests in my opinion (or at least for the way I travel and pack). And without movements, at least if you use them for architectural and urban work for example, a digicam offers a rough approximation at best. And personally I think the best way to learn how your film will render a scene is by shooting more film and getting more experience. But then I learned on film, so I'm biased.

I think a DSLR or other system camera would be most useful for complex lighting setups and studio work. I still use fuji instant film in those situations, but I may start bringing a dslr instead.

[Kirk Gittings]

Don't attempt to assess the quality of a digital exposure using the LCD image, it will just be misleading. Use the histogram function to see the range of tones and whether or not some pixels are blown or not. One problem with using digital as a preview format for film is the linear response curve of a digital sensor compared to the S-shaped curve for film. In essence, we get more information in the "tails". Having said that, the dynamic range of digital sensors is improving rapidly these days.

HTH, Kris.

This is absolutely true for digital capture and as a substitute for a lighmeter. What you see on the LCD renderered JPG is meaningless really. Exposure is always best judged by the histogram.

[jermaineB]

I use the lightmeter app on the iPhone as well, but am I the only one that noticed its more accurate than the one on the 3GS version? I know the camera lens is better but I wonder if it will change with future phones. I just wish there was a case with a lanyard so I could hang it around my neck.

[Frank Petronio]

I've used them off and on for years, they are really useful for composing the shot as well, I switch the preview to a B&W mode and you can see tone mergers and other issues that you might miss otherwise. With lights they are essential and so much faster and less expensive than Polaroid. And for many subjects, Matrix metering and a good histogram are enough for me to feel confident about trusting them for exposure, after you get some experience. More often than not they tend to be within half a stop of what I figure with the spot meter - it is the extreme lighting conditions that often fools them, like really bright desert light when you are at 1/250 @ f/22 on the digital but you know the film really needs 1/250th @ f/11 from experience. In most normal light and contrast ranges they work great.

[jp]

I use my dslr to test lighting (histogram) or to get a subject "warmed up" for the cameras. It's not APUG, we can use digital equipment for anything we want, anytime.

Obviously, contrast, shadows, highlights will differ between digital and film, but that differs between film/developer combinations and films as well. So, as always, there is no substitute for knowing how your film/developer combination works in real life.

[Two23]

I use a Nikon DSLR for my night flash shots. Remember that what I'm doing is lighting up freight trains rolling down the track at 50 mph. I don't get a second chance, and I only get one shot. I'm using up to seven White Lightning X3200 monolights and CyberSync triggers. The Nikon gives me a quick idea of where the light is hitting and of the exposure. That allows me to then fine tune it.


Ket in SD

[eberry_tapes]

I used to use an Olympus EP-1 to take some test shots, but I, like a few others mentioned, have started using my iPhone for metering/visualizing and haven't looked back. It's quick and a great way to log info on your shots pretty much on the fly. Honestly, with the metering app on the phone I don't really ever feel the need to use the actual spotmeter I have.

[mcherry]

I use Viewfinder Pro on my iPhone to pre-visualize what lens to use. Then I use Lightmeter on the phone if I need a spot meter. Other than that, my D800 stays home, I can shoot film in my sleep....

OMG! Dude, I was JUST looking at buying another director's finder as my old one went missing years ago. I just downloaded Viewfinder Pro and it is pure awesome. Thank you so much!

[buggz]

Any of those iPhone apps ported to the Android devices?
I'll have to search...

[welly]

I had a look at viewfinder pro for the iPhone, problem I see with it, for me anyway, is the widest it'll go is about 35mm equivalent which unfortunately is no good for me as I mostly shoot wider. Other than that, I'm not 100% sure about the benefits of it as surely you can compose on your ground glass? What does it offer that I'm apparently missing?

[Ivan J. Eberle]

I don't have any problem with my Nikon DSLRs providing extremely precise spot meter readings, arguably better than any dedicated spot meter as they're essentially color temperature agnostic and not easily fooled. Matrix is pretty good for not burning out highlights with transparency films, on the Nikon film bodies (F5) I've used. On Pentax film bodies and Nikon DSLRs I've seen the metering biased toward overexposure with evaluative/matrix metering. But Spot metering is always right on.
It's usually only critical for transparency films, with negs I confidently use my c.1948 General Electric DW58 Selenium cell meter as it yet agrees with my spot meters in most lighting conditions. And keep in mind that bracketing you exposures is always extra insurance for tricky lighting or if you have a questionable leaf shutter.

[Leonard Evens]

I use my NIkon D90 to "scout" for pictures. That is, I take a variety of pictures from different positions and using different focal lengths. But I seldom use the image on the lcd to decide what to do with my view camera. I go home and process the DSLR images, cropping the 3:2 image appropriately for 4 x 5.
I use those images to help me with composition and point of view. I seldom use them to determine exposure. I find my spotmeter provides a better guide when coupled with zone system considerations.