|
|
 | | Author | |
|
| | Date | |
|
|
|
|
Phil Davis |
8:12 28 Jun 04 |
|
|
Michael Carboy |
22:55 4 Jun 03 |
|
|
Phil |
18:13 6 Jun 03 |
|
|
MEC |
11:58 13 Jun 03 |
|
|
Brian Mikiten |
6:35 1 Jun 03 |
|
|
Angelo Micheletti |
8:01 27 Aug 03 |
|
|
Phil |
12:58 25 May 03 |
|
  |
metering, palm, exposure, conflicts? |
|
michael |
16:21 14 May 03 |
 |
Greetings All,
Here's the question: For approx. 7 SBR type scenes (eg, not "extreme" scenes), has anyone noticed the distinctly different exposure information when one compares meter exposure data to palm data?? Before you all jump and say the meter is used differently (ISO 100 for BTZS use or EFS for traditonal meter use), read on... I think I address that..
For example, lets use my TMY (DDX1+8) data for discussion. For a 7SBR range, my results show TMY having a speed of about 500....So the shadow EV is 12.5 and the highlight EV at 14.8 (or an SBR of 7.3)....
According to my Minolta incident meter, film speed set at 400 (not 500), recommended exposure for the "shadowed area" (for the same shadow area that generated the measured EV12.5 at ISO 100,noted above) was 1/30 at f22.5
now, putting all this into the palm.. using a paper ES of 0.95 and a 135mm lens, no filters, distance shot....Lo EV 12.5, Hi EV 14.8.... recommend exposure of 1/125 at f22
basically a stop and a half difference than the level recommended by the meter....
I had thought the low EV reading we take for the palm set the basic exposure for the shadow.. and the hi EV was used to determine the development time....for example, if i stick to 12.5 as the low ev and increase the hi ev to 15.8, the recommended exposure stays at 1/125 f22 and the development time is shorter (no surprise there).
So has anyone else thought about this topic?? For "normal" scenes, shouldn't we expect be agreement between traditional meter/exposure calculation and those exposure guidelines provided by the palm software???
The reason I pose this question is simple.. I managed to forget my palm while out shooting, yet had my charts folded up in my bag... so, i figured I would meter for the shadows, expose and then figure the developing time based on the measured SBR...the results were hugely overexposed negs, but still printable.... seems i really am dependent on the darned palm!
best,
michael
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil |
6:35 15 May 03 |
|
|
howard schwartz |
12:06 8 Apr 03 |
|
|
