RE: [Leica] Guestimating exposure?

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Best method? Take a series of reflected and incident readings when and where
you're about to start shooting - then put the meter away and adjust up or
down as the lighting conditions change.

B. D.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of
> Hans-Peter.Lammerich
> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 7:45 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] Guestimating exposure?
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I always admired those guys who are confident in reliably
> estimating exposure
> without using a meter, at least with negative film. Moreover,
> I consider this
> ability as a precondition to actually enjoy using a M2, M3 or
> M4. Of course I
> looked at the little tables that come with most films or that
> are shown in older
> books on photography, but looking up tables is more annoying
> than using a
> handheld meter. Also, a have my fair share of experience in
> using the M6's
> coupled meter. As a result I am now quite confident in
> guestimating exposure
> indoor under artificial light and under the open sky.
>
> Apparently the architects of public buildings, department
> stores, offices,
> underground stations etc. follow certain engineering
> standards in lighting which
> usually result to something like a 1/60, f=1/2 with 400 ASA.
> Smaller offices
> with lower ceiling and bright lights. are rather in the 1/60,
> F=1/4 range. A
> living room or a pub may go down to 1/30 or 1/15 with f=1/1,4.
>
> Under open sky conditions I apply the "sunny 16" rule (1/500"
> with f=1/11, ASA
> 400). Depending on the clouds I may open the aperture by up
> to 4 stops. 1 or 2
> hours after sunrise or until sunset, an additional correction
> by minus 1 or 2
> stops seems to be necessary.
>
> But I have problems to estimate exposure in narrow, shady
> streets and for
> shadows in general. For a time I thought that a correction by
> minus 2 stops, in
> addition to the above, of course, would be the right
> approach, but to often this
> resulted in underexposure. Apparently, the indirect light
> depends to much on
> facade colour, height of buildings.
>
> I would therefore appreciate if I could share the experience
> of other LUGgers,
> particularly if there is someone who has a more systematic approach.
>
> Hans-Peter
>
>
>