Grey card wrong?

[Leigh]

I still prefer a spot though. To each their own.

Hi Alan,

I use a spot meter quite frequently, probably close to 50% of the time.
The meters I carry are Sekonic L-558, which have incident, reflectance, and 1-degree spot all available.

My concern is that proper use of ZS metering is a complex subject, with many subtleties that can be lost on newbies.

I always recommend starting with incident reading to get familiar with the concept and environmental variables.
Once the student is able to get consistent results, then ZS can be introduced for finer control.

- Leigh

[Alan Gales]

Leigh, I started out as most of us with a reflective meter in a 35mm camera. I owned a Contax 139 with Zeiss lenses and shot Kodachrome 25 and printed with my Beseler enlarger with Schneider lens on Cibachrome. That's learning exposure the hard way. Everything so contrasty!

I fully understand using incident meters for students. It's easier for a newbie. For the experienced medium and large format crowd I feel a spot meter is the best way to go.

I used to hate in camera reflective meters but I have to admit that the in camera matrix meter in my Nikon D300 is unbelievable.

[Steve Smith]

It seems to me that a white card would be better than a grey card.

It would be much easier to get a consistent reflectance than with a printed grey colour and a greater percentage of light reflected makes for a more accurate reading, especially in lower light situations.

It just needs compensation added at the metering stage.


Steve.

[swmcl]

Effectively then what I've done is paint a styro ball such that it gives me the same reading from the spotmeter as I get from using the incident meter (directed at the camera) at the same location in the same light. Being a ball and assuming the paint is uniform all over it should then give me a reading that is the same as the incident meter in all orientations. Not that there are that many given its got a hole in it for a stick !

I noticed that the reading from either ball or incident was around 2/3rds of a stop different to anything I got from the grey card. Yes the grey card is old and I reckon a bit shiny from sweating it out in a plastic sleeve for 10+ years too.

This query has evolved in directions not envisaged. It is precisely because I'm not confident enough in my own perceptive abilities when using spot that I rely on an incident reading to get me closer in the first place. Don't get me wrong, I do use spot and realise there are situations where one can only use spot but I much prefer to know the incident reading if possible. There certainly is a real skill in being able to use a spot meter effectively. There are a number on this forum who would be in the most elite of practitioners I'm sure.

Actually, what I have done in the past is take an incident reading and evaluate the scene. If there is a very wide range of values (landscapes in Aus can go well beyond a 11 stop SBR) then pull development. In fact, pull development anyway !

To a great extent I already know I'll lose information at either end of the spectrum so worrying about a stop here and there is a bit pointless I reckon. When shooting chromes bracketing is mandatory really. That or forget general scenes and perhaps focus onto a smaller lower SBR subject.

Quite a few years ago I got awarded a free licence for that SBR software with the Eiffel tower on its website ... Photomatix because I found a glitch that wouldn't allow certain large file sizes or they couldn't process them properly or something... I never did use the software again but I have been concerned with high SBR for some time just because of where I live.

One of the reasons for using Pyrocat-HD in glycol for me was that 'highlights don't blow out' ... but now I'm a bit bored with what I think is a bit of a flat tonality. I'm still learning though and hopefully always will to some extent.

Salute !

[cyrus]

Effectively then what I've done is paint a styro ball such that it gives me the same reading from the spotmeter as I get from using the incident meter (directed at the camera) at the same location in the same light. Being a ball and assuming the paint is uniform all over it should then give me a reading that is the same as the incident meter in all orientations. Not that there are that many given its got a hole in it for a stick !

I noticed that the reading from either ball or incident was around 2/3rds of a stop different to anything I got from the grey card. Yes the grey card is old and I reckon a bit shiny from sweating it out in a plastic sleeve for 10+ years too.

This query has evolved in directions not envisaged.

Indeed, but I'm still trying to figure out your readings. How smoothly painted is the ball? would the surfce texture make a diffrernce i wondeer

[djdister]

Effectively then what I've done is paint a styro ball such that it gives me the same reading from the spotmeter as I get from using the incident meter (directed at the camera) at the same location in the same light. Being a ball and assuming the paint is uniform all over it should then give me a reading that is the same as the incident meter in all orientations. Not that there are that many given its got a hole in it for a stick !

I don't understand the use of a spherical shape for spot readings. Depending where you direct your spot meter, the ball will have shadows and highlights on it. The purpose of a ball shape on an incident meter is a different approach, such that it acts as a representative and averaging 3D collector of the illumination hitting an object, but I wouldn't select a ball shape to take a spot reading off of.

[Kirk Gittings]

Move into the same light as the subject, i.e. move out of the shade.

I did not claim that incident meters were universally more useful than spot meters.
No tool is most useful under all possible conditions.

I said they were more accurate, because they eliminate the subjective evaluation of tonality
inherent in the spot metering system.

A spot meter can be used to good advantage by a shooter who is experienced in its application.
But obtaining that level of proficiency can take a lifetime of practice.

- Leigh

Well that's the point isn't it. In a landscape the shade may extend for a mile or more. It's simply not feasible to always find a way to stand in the same light as the subject. This is a no brainer with a spot meter, but I don't know how I would asses an exposure here with an incident meter. I could get the shadows from where I am but I really need to know he brightness of the sunlit cliffs and the sunlit clouds to get at proper exposure and development-for me anyway. Also I would say it takes a couple of years of practice-not a lifetime.

[sanking]

Well that's the point isn't it. In a landscape the shade may extend for a mile or more. It's simply not feasible to always find a way to stand in the same light as the subject. This is a no brainer with a spot meter, but I don't know how I would asses an exposure here with an incident meter. I could get the shadows from where I am but I really need to know he brightness of the sunlit cliffs and the sunlit clouds to get at proper exposure and development-for me anyway. Also I would say it takes a couple of years of practice-not a lifetime.

Kirk,

That would be a very easy scene to meter with an incident meter. The value of the open shadow will be virtually same in the distance, where you are standing, or somewhere nearby. You can even simulate the shadow value by taking the reading in the shade of your vehicle, or under a tree. Yes, you need to know the brightness of the cliff, but not for exposure. You need to know this, and the brightness of other highlight values, for development. And this will be different for your process. One would develop differently for negatives that are to be scanned, for VC silver papers, and pt/pd. This of course you must determine with some system, perhaps Zone, or BTZS or some personal method. But it is a development issue, not an exposure one.

In any event, the landscape vista with cliffs and clouds would be a very easy subject for an incident reading for anyone with a working knowledge of BTZS, or failing that, just meter for the shadows and don't develop so much that you are not able to scan the highlights, or print them with your process.

Sandy

[Drew Wiley]

Gosh that's a magnificent scene, Kirk. Once again your timing was spot on. But with regard the other kind of "spot", namely spotmetering, it's good to keep in mind
that some of us use these things not only for black and white work but color also. Meters needs to be calibrated and understood not only in relation to gray value
but also spectral sensitivity, because the two things are actually related. The cell in the Pentax and Minolta spotmeters has peak sensitivity very similar to the
human eye, right around 550nm mid-green, then rather evenly tapers off each direction. The people who are generally way ahead of any of us in understanding
meter ability are obviously color filmmakers, and the Pentax was specifically manufactured for their needs. That's why there are IRE markings on these, and not just
EV values, or some paste-over Zone sticker like Fred Picker sold. I use such spotmeters for everything, even 35mm snapshot work, and find this method of working
much more precise than any TTL system. I'm not going to get in an argument over this versus the merits of incident metering, other than to state that the latter
method never really worked for me. Often I need to compare very small areas against one another.

[Ken Lee]

Kirk,

That would be a very easy scene to meter with an incident meter. The value of the open shadow will be the virtually same in the distance, where you are standing, or somewhere nearby. You can even simulate the shadow value by taking the reading in the shade of your vehicle, or under a tree. Yes, you need to know the brightness of the cliff, but not for exposure. You need to know this, and the brightness of other highlight values, for development. And this will be different for your process. One would develop differently for negatives that are to be scanned, for VC silver papers, and pt/pd. This of course you must determine with some system, perhaps Zone, or BTZS or some personal method. But it is a development issue, not an exposure one.

In any event, the landscape vista with cliffs and clouds would be a very easy subject for an incident reading for anyone with a working knowledge of BTZS, or failing that, just meter for the shadows and don't develop so much that you are not able to scan the highlights, or print them with your process.

Sandy

What Sandy said. I for one am eternally grateful for his clear explanation of these principles.

Here's a sample photo where I just took one incident reading of my own shadow, shot the scene, and went home. (It took a while to get confident about this approach, but I rarely use my spot meter any more.)

Although I go way back with the Zone System, I didn't bother to check the clouds or the values of the rocks, sand, water etc. Besides, which rocks should be on which Zone anyhow ?