 aileen cockburn |
Buying a Hand-Held Light Meter I am am looking to buy a light meter. Can anyone suggest which one would be best? I am using a Canon 300d SLR. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
||
|
John H. Siskin |
Hi Alileen, In the classes I teach, I don’t suggest that people get meters. A digital camera provides better information than a meter would. This is information about metering from one of my classes: When you use a strobe meter, you get a response that tells you how to make a middle density, but it doesn’t tell you how to make it look right. There is no automatic way to make it look right - only the application of brains can do that. When I make a shot with strobes and a digital camera, the first thing I do is to put the camera on manual and I will pay no attention to the meter in the camera. The only things I pay attention to are the proof image on the camera back and the histogram. More than metering, these two things tell you about your image. Let me suggest a plan for seeking the right exposure: 1) Set the shutter speed to the sync speed; 2) Set the aperture to your middle aperture, whatever that is on the lens you are using; 3) Take a picture, it will be wrong; 4) Move the aperture dial to let in more or less light based on test exposure 1. You can look at the histogram to help determine how much to change the aperture, but the proof image should tell you if you need to change a lot or a little; 5) More test exposures and changes of light placement and light power until the strobes are right; 6) Change shutter speed to balance values between existing light and strobe light, this will require more test pictures. This same technique will work if you are mixing strobes and daylight. This was why the Polaroid bill was so high with film cameras, but with digital, these test exposures are free, so we should not be afraid to make them. This is the essential trick with strobes: to evaluate and change our images in search of the right levels for our lights and our exposures. With the histogram and the proof image on camera or in the computer, we have better tools for creating the right exposure than any meter could give us, but it does take repeated testing. Thanks! John Siskin
|
|
|
|
||
|
aileen cockburn |
thanks for your help john I really appreciate it. I will give it ago Aileen
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bruce A. Dart |
Aileen, There are probably as many ways to determine fairly accurate exposures as there are photographers. I disagree partially with John here. He is 100% correct on the info you can obtain with the tests he is suggesting without a meter. So you don't HAVE to buy a meter to get the results you are looking for. However, there are many meters out there (and yes some are expensive) to get you most of that information a little quicker. Manual mode on the camera with an incident light reading (measuring the light falling on the subject, as opposed to reflected off the subject)gets you quite close. Each individual location has its own characteristics and here is where the histogram provides a much needed double check. Fill flash is a whole 'nother subject. I usually spend a couple of hours on that in the classes I teach. The basic concept is using the flash at one F-stop below the ambient light in order to create a more natural looking image and a lighting ratio of the basic 3:1 that is most flattering in portraiture. Of course it works with any subject also. Without knowing what you intend to use the meter for, it's hard to give real accurate suggestions. Many meters measure ambient light, flash, and/or incident light. There are also spot meters which can work with a zone system. Unless you have a specific subject that needs more specific metering, you can probably use what you have. The first time you try any of this it will be harder. Doing the work a number of times makes the whole process easier. Good luck.
|
|
|
|
||
|
anonymous |
Hi Aileen I use a Sekonic light meter. It is great and I althought the above suggestion works, it is also time consuming, also, yes, the histogram gives you a good indication of how the image has exposed, but the onscreen display is not reliable. A light meter is imperative for lighting ratios and makes it very quick and easy to measure them. I do all my measuring based on "incident" readings, ie, holding the light meter at the subject back at the camera. Basically similar to a reflect meter on a grey card. Definiately get a light meter, it will only make you a better photographer and you will learn a lot more about lighting and ratios etc.
|
|
|
|
||
|
John H. Siskin |
Hi Aileen, Regardless of where you get your starting point if you stop there and accept the metered exposure as the way the picture should be taken you do yourself a disservice. When I worked with film I started with a meter, but I spent more time with Polaroid perfecting the lighting. Lighting should be customized to fit your subject and your location. I have worked with people who didn’t use their eyes, just the meter. Thanks, John Siskin
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bruce A. Dart |
John's recent comment should be etched in stone and made to be read by anyone picking up a camera!! Well said. Metering is a starting point and somewhat like seasoning to taste. Most meters measure 18 percent gray or midtones -- the theory being that if the midtones are accurate that the rest will fall in line. Perhaps, but not necessarily so. Like Kodak's sunny 16 rule it will get you somewhat close. How you fine tune things is up to you, and whether or not you need to be extremely accurate or just in the ballpark. There is so much "fudge" factor in photography that you can be constantly adjusting, especially with digital, instead of getting it right in the first place. Learning photography many moons ago, I shot without a light meter with the old Tri-X film. Outside on a bright sunny day I shot at 125th of a sec. and f/16, overexposing by at least two stops. When the lab compensated, until I learned the difference, I felt that "oh that worked I'll use that as my standard." Until, that is, I had to print it myself one day and discovered how much overexposed the negative really was. We ALL need to keep learning AND KEEP SHARING!
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Ailleen in case you get frustrated with what at first sounds light conflicting answers, you can look at it this way. The meter approach, you can measure your flashes, get an exact f/stop reading, balance the ratios between different lights, and make adjustments fairly quickly and easily. And accurately. The histogram/monitor approach, you see how a picture looks with the lighting choice. What the light meter won't do that using the monitor will is let you see something like if this surface is more reflective than I thought, will the highlight be too bright. Or do I make a light darker than correct exposure to get a different mood to the photo. Or does using extra diffusion give a better look to something that's translucent. One way or the other, or both in conjunction. Each chef has their own way of cooking.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
By the way, Sekonic and Minolta are good ones. Not the only ones, but brands that I'm more familiar with. And you camera brand doesn't matter.
|
|
|
|
||
|
aileen cockburn |
WOW thank you everyone you have all gave me sonething to think about and try out. I will play about at the weekend with the info I get from my camera and try that for a while intil I get paid and then look for a meter. Thank you everyone for your help. Aileen
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||