Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/12/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Kitchen table
From: jbm at jbm.org (Jeff Moore)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 18:29:01 -0500
References: <AANLkTikv4OvP-L5rO=BBGJCaQHkx=vCEKswSNQTz5bdD@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimvi7TMV7psG0JQMgJHC5sdUdFou5LjhSnKfn=6@mail.gmail.com>

The photo has the tonalities rendered as well as anyone could hope
for.  Your technique is clearly working.

2010-12-21-03:47:21 Daniel Ridings:
> It's simple. I see the light I like, I read it falling onto the
> subject in the places I am interested in, and hope for the best
> everywhere else. I always use the meter in incident light reading
> mode. I've never really come to grips with reflected readings. Most of
> the the time you just end up adjusting a reflected reading, based on
> the tone of the subject, so that you end right back up with what you
> would have gotten with incident light.

This completely makes sense.  That's always been my reaction to
incident-versus-reflected metering.  It always seemed to me that if
you wanted the tones to just land exactly where they should,
automatically, you'd do an incident reading in the same light the
subject is getting.  Reflected metering would be for when you can't
get into the same light to meter it.

And incident metering always semed a good match for slide film, and
digital sensors are (in my opinion) more similar to chrome film than
to negative film.

Of course, despite those theories, I spend most of my time using
reflected metering, generally trying to figure out some spot on the
subject which looks as if it should have the same refflectivity as
medium gray.  Go figure.  In my defense, I also spend a lot of time in
places with distinct pools of artificial light.

 -Jeff


In reply to: Message from daniel at dlridings.se (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] Kitchen table)
Message from daniel at dlridings.se (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] Kitchen table)