Grey card wrong?

[Bill Burk]

Continuing to explain my change in position on this thread - as reflected by reality - When I meter in incident mode, and then switch to reflected-light mode to use a Zone System evaluation (like placing a reading of the palm of my hand on Zone VI)... DOES NOT result in the same reading either way.

What I get by reading two different ways, are two different exposure recommendations, both of which may be considered valid.

Then I make a decision which one fits my needs of the moment. If I need speed for handheld in low-light situation, I might choose the lesser exposure. Otherwise, I usually take the reading that suggests more exposure.

[Ken Lee]

Initially skeptical, I eventually found - and continue to find - that a single incident reading for the shadows always agrees with the reading I derive by taking multiple spot-meter readings.

Last weekend I made this photo and because of this thread I had some doubts - so I checked everything with my 1-degree spot meter. The indicated exposure was the same.

I'm sure there will be situations where one method or another is inadequate. However, for 99% of the use-cases I encounter, the incident reading is reliable. It's not perfect, it's not exclusive, it's just... very convenient.

We might even say that the necessity of a spot meter is one of those "Beliefs" inherited from our "forefathers".

[Bill Burk]

Initially skeptical, I eventually found - and continue to find - that a single incident reading for the shadows always agrees with the reading I derive by taking multiple spot-meter readings.

When you take the meter reading for the shadows, do you adjust exposure downward in order to make the shadows realistically "darker" than meter suggests?

Reading BTZS I find this is recommended, and since I found I should expect a 2/3 stop difference between incident and reflected... I'm looking for possible reasons why your readings agree with each other.

And if you take your shadow incident reading literally - don't change what you do if it already works for you. It may be that you cancel out the differences between metering incident and spotmetering by NOT compensating when you read incident light in the shadows.

[Drew Wiley]

Brett's approach was really very different (not to slight Ken's image - I'm referring to the visual strategy). He wanted his graphic shadows blacked out, and seems to have often deliberately underexposed and overdeveloped the neg to get both that effect and very rich midtone gradation. And apparently, he didn't generally use meters at all, but worked from memory. Merg Ross could no doubt describe this more accurately than me. But sometimes I use the same strategy myself - not often;
but once in awhile I quite deliberately aim for that BW look in a print, and in my case, I do it with a spotmeter, so I can deliberately lop off a zone or two from a
steep-toed film, then plus-develop.

[Ken Lee]

As suggested in the BTZS book, I set the ISO to 1 stop higher than the ISO at which I rate the film. Since I rate TMY and HP5+ at 200, my incident meter is set to 400.

Beyond the Zone System, 4th Edition, "Metering for the Incident System" pp 134:

"Notice that these film speeds seem exaggerated; they are, in fact, just double the normal speeds. As explained earlier, this is done deliberately to compensate for the 1-stop overexposure that normally results when the camera settings are based on the low-light incident reading."

[Bill Burk]

Great Ken!

Is your spotmeter set at 200 then? It would make sense if you do.

The OP uses an all-in-one meter, the L-758DR which has an ISO1 and ISO2 setting that might be used to follow the BTZS shadow metering technique.

[Drew Wiley]

I'd sure like to see how some of you incident junkies would manage the intricately dappled light here in the redwoods when the sun is out, and twelve stops of range
come into play. It can change by the minute. Guess one just gets accustomed to whatever.

[Bill Burk]

That's when you use the two-exposure trick... One very brief exposure to catch the highlights only... then wait 5 minutes for the fog to roll in and make the base exposure.

[sanking]

I'd sure like to see how some of you incident junkies would manage the intricately dappled light here in the redwoods when the sun is out, and twelve stops of range
come into play. It can change by the minute. Guess one just gets accustomed to whatever.

Assuming we are talking about exposing B&W film this is more of a development issue than an exposure issue. And the fact that the sun is coming and going is not relevant because the reading in the deepest shadow (area not touched by the sun) is not going to change much regardless of whether the sun is shining or hidden by clouds. So whether the sun is shining, or covered by clouds, you could take an incident reading in an area of very deep shadows similar to the spot in the deep redwoods, or you can take a spot reading of the shadows and then figure out how to place it.

But ultimately it is more of an aesthetic issue than one of metering. Do you want to develop the film to show the entire range of tonal values from deepest shadows to highlight highlights, or do you intend to sacrifice one or the other? For this knowing the subject luminance range and how to develop the film for that range is the critical issue, not how you measure the SLR.

Either way, it would not be difficult to meter a scene like that with an incident reading. I could do it with a spot meter also as my meter is a Sekonic that offers both incident reading, and 1º spot.

Sandy

[Leigh]

I'd sure like to see how some of you incident junkies would manage the intricately dappled light here in the redwoods when the sun is out, and twelve stops of range come into play.

You're not going to capture twelve stops of range on normal b&w film regardless of how you expose it.

Black is black, as the song says.

- Leigh