Analogue Photography - Methods of Exposing

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

As I have done film for most of my photography time, I may be of some simplified help here, albeit it is as both Julian and Hamish already have said. Since you should have your 28mm today, to put on your brick of a camera, I feel entitled to comment. I did mostly slides and with them you had to be accurate when exposing. Any camera of film days measure the light in 18% grey, so they do now also, except that many digital cameras of today have built in thousands of examples of images in their datamind and compare them to what you are about to shoot in nano seconds. Therefore it comes out right almost all the time.

Now, as the camera measures in 18% grey, a good help is to know where to measure the light in your "about to composed" image. I always decided to have mine in aperture priority so as to decide the dof always. Only sports changes that. If I had time, I set an aperture, found what would appear to the camera as 18% grey in my image to come and set the shutter accordingly. In manual of course. That Rob, never went wrong. But there's always a butt! You have to know what is 18 % grey around you and in the light you have at hand. That is a learning task. I'll give you some examples so it'll be a little easier as well as you have to keep in mind what is important in your image to come. Is it, " heaven and hell," as I usually call it, in other words sky and ground, then it can be difficult. Again what's important in this picture? The ground or the sky? Use centre average measurement on your F4, that's my recommendation albeit the matrix metering on Nikons are very good. Now whether you choose aperture priority and let the shutter take care of itself does not matter much or totally manual. All you have to remember is to measure where you ought to and lock the exposure by a knob on your camera and aperture priority.
Now to what is 18 % grey. The ground usually is, especially asphalt, green grass, the palm of your hand almost, grey brickwalls etc. You'll learn where eventually. Point measurement can help you a lot too. It's all about where to measure. Some other tips Rob. Measure on a pure white wall, sky whatever, snow maybe and the camera shall measure it 18 % grey. But if you compensate on your shutter by 1,5 steps plus or about 1,75 you should always come out right. When measuring on total black, well then it is the other way around. And a last word, take whatever digital camera you have and do as I say, in this way it won't cost you anything, try it out quite quickly and you'll see that I am right. All the best to you. I hope I haven't forgotten anything, I am getting older you know.

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

Spent the last hour looking at the beautifully exposed photos of Edward Weston, Paul Strand and Ansel Adams, and being left with the not very nice feeling in my gut that I really don't know what I'm doing - and that I'd like to change that.

When shooting analogue, I always opt for auto exposure when available. My experience with medium format and manual exposure left an impression on me that it is hard to get exposure just right, in fact I very often got it very wrong. I used an old exposure meter and/or an exposure app on my phone - both were often in disagreement. So, auto exposure it is...

But I feel I'd like to refine AE to suit my aesthetic preferences, which means overriding it. I'm not mathematically gifted, so complex equations won't help at all. I don't really understand the zone system either. Part of me, the negative part, thinks I'm too damned stupid to understand what I should be doing to achieve the best exposure. Part of me thinks I'm stupid for thinking that...

Here's a badly-exposed shot I did recently, using the Hexar and XP2:

View attachment 10111

I just focussed on the brickwork with a half-pressed shutter, then recomposed. F5.6, if I remember correctly. The sky is overblown, and the path/wall in the foreground is somewhat disappointing. I remember definitely wanting the curve of that small wall in the frame, as it provides some continuity to the shadow on the brickwork under the bridge.

I feel a knowledge of the zone system would have helped here. What should I have done? Take a reading of the sky, the bridge, the path, then somehow work out an average exposure? Wouldn't that just render a flat image?

Your advice appreciated...

Nik Silver version: It has more definition to the trees beneath the brickwork, but has lost any detail of the path. The sky has a bit of grain, but hasn't improved much.

View attachment 10113

I would say, on my screen, that both are right. What is important for you to be right here? I would think the bridge and a bit of the foreground which you have managed to do in your first one. Naturally the highlights here are blown, namely the sky. But in this picture I should think that the sky is not important. Like I said previously, Heaven or hell! One has to choose when it comes to film when some conditions are like this. A darker sky here would have helped you a lot, so to speak. Cheers mate.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Thanks, Ivar. Will write more later, when I have time...

 

[Rob MacKillop]

@Ivar D. Larsen - I have more time now.

I almost always shoot in Aperture Priority mode, as that seems the most significant thing for my compositions. If there is auto exposure, usually I just let it get on with it, without interfering. But sometimes the result just isn't right, as you also know.

It is interesting to read that you suggest Centre Average metering, as that is something I've never used. 98% of the time I use Matrix, and a few times I've used Spot. Why do you suggest Centre Average, what are the advantages?

So, you say - measure a white wall and set EV to +1.5 or more. Black area, set EV to -1.5. OK. I will.

The original shot I did doesn't look so bad now. My eye is being educated away from digital, and every now and again it gets pulled back

Thanks, Ivar. I will find a way, but your advice helps. The lens has not arrived yet - I will let you know when it does.

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

Ok let me know about your immediate experience. The film based cameras of early days were always centre average where the measurement is done in a circle of approximately 60 %. On your camera you can adjust the centre average if I'm not mistaken, from 20 - 40 - or 60 % I would still recommend 60%, as it takes care of most in your image. Spot measuring is absolutely the most accurate if you teach yourself where to point it and measure since it only covers 2% in the middle. Let me give you an example; if you shoot a woman on stage where it is quite dark, use spot metering and measure on her cheek and it should be correct if the person is not too lit.

 

[Ian Grant]

Get Ansel Adam's book "The Negative".

Those of us who learnt the hard way before TTL metering actually find metering easy what ever type of meter we use. I mostly use a spotmeter these days, I have a Minolta it's extremely accurate with film or digital (still made by another company) and have a Pentax & Capitol (Soligor).

If I use an Auto mode it's with digital only and it's always it's Program and I will adjust to suit and over-ride if needed, or switch to manual.

Ian

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Cheers, Ian. As mentioned above, I do have The Negative, but I have to admit to not really following everything in it. I have used a Weston light meter before, and also the FotometerPro app, which is excellent, when doing medium format work with meter-less cameras, and noticed that both the Weston and the app were not always in agreement. Other than spending a couple of hundred pounds or more on a Seconic, I think staying with one meter all the time is a wise thing. You learn to adjust its readings through experience of the results.

So, I can manage to get a reasonably accurate exposure, but rarely as well as it could be. I'm therefore thinking my technique could be improved. I got The Negative down off the shelf this evening, and have started reading it again. We shall see if any of it sinks in this time.

Thanks for your comments, Ian.