Man, I'm so glad to have recently discovered this channel! Finally, a photography-related channel hosted by someone who isn't a douchey-artsy neo-Euro wannabe; and who isn't hawking a bunch of merchandise! Thank you!!!! THIS is what I've been looking for.
As a ( very) old photographer may I compliment you on this explanation of metering and the zone system. The latter, is, I sometimes feel, made unnecessarily complex by some writers. This is one of the best that I have seen. Very enjoyable on top of that. Personally I only use film, as, I have seldom used anything else . I suppose I simply dislike computerised images, I am quite capable of buggering up my own photographs without the aid of a computer. In any event thank you for all your work. Best wishes from England
Many thanks for the kind words! Just hearing the words “Zone System” used to scare me, I’ll admit. And I guess it can get quite technical when you include the development and printing methods. But for metering, I was surprised at how un-complicated it could be. Now, I’m thinking about doing an episode on the development adjustments. I’m sure I’d learn a lot in the process. Honestly, I tend to learn something new every time I do one of these. Lots of stuff I discover along the way. And lot’s of ideas come from comments. I appreciate you watching! Cheers!
Just finished watching your two videos on metering and I must say they are the best I have seen on this subject. It’s has great examples and covers the topic very well. Thank you for your time and effort in producing this video.
Thank you so much for this. I have been on a journey to teach myself about exposure and this is the best explanation by far. Your guide to the zone system is invaluable. I will be using this as I practice.
Awesome! Glad you found this helpful. “Proper” exposure has always been an enigma of sorts. Thus all the different methods of going about it. I used to be 100% for incident metering. But, like just about anything, dealing in absolutes isn’t always the best route. Have fun on your journey and don’t hesitate to reach out with any questions! Thanks for watching!
A very good question to camera producers would be”why did you privilege the development of matrix for film and digital, and not multiple spot metering?” I’m sure more pictures in the world would have been exposed better. lol
That’s a very astute observation. Why, indeed? I’ll hazard a guess and say it came down to economics. The multi-spot is very similar to Matrix. The main difference being with MS, the photographer chooses the measuring areas. But perhaps the accuracy didn’t outweigh the costs? I don’t know. I’ve definitely had bad exposures in cameras with matrix metering, but hardly ever using one with multi-spot.
Excellent! Thank you very much for being so clear and complete with the right examples. I have the Minolta 8000i with the spot measurement card, but I have never used it because it did not come with a manual. I am going to try it, although of course with film the trial and error is not as easy as with digital cameras.
The trial and error is certainly not as affordable as with digital, to be sure. I find that using the multi-spot feature is generally fool-proof though. I think you’ll have good luck with it. Cheers!
Agreed. Or just adding ANY filter to the equation, tbh. I started to include something along those lines, but talked myself out of it. So there’s still room for another sequel!
Very thorough and very well received. This is precisely what I needed to know. Thank you and I am now a subscriber to your channel and am looking forward to seeing more about film photography.
I thoroughly enjoyed this video. I have a Minolta Flashmeter V with a spot meter attachment. I haven't figured out exactly how to work it. I will definitely break it out again. I have been meaning to do a video myself with my 8000i Mir or my 9. You've inspired me.
Excellent! I’d love to see either of those in action. The Mir is certainly an eye-catching camera. And I’ve been playing around with the idea of picking up a 9 for a while now. Thanks for watching!
Thank you for an interesting and relaxing video. It’s presented in such a calm and measured fashion. I think you’ve done a good job of conveying a basic understanding of the zone system . I’ll keep this saved as a reference point on that
@@vintagecameradigest you’re welcome. As the presenter / host you achieved the result of PRESENTING it calmly, you got to that end result so that’s fine . P.S. I was glad to see the Minolta in action with the spot metering card. I have seen so intruded by them that I’ve bought a little group of the cards and am still on the hunt for a decent camera body
Yes, that expansion card in particular has got to be Minolta’s best-kept secret - for better or worse. I acquired a few different ones, myself. And I’m sure it’s gimmicky/kitschy, but I’m really interested in what the “Fantasy” card will do. Have yet to try it, tho.
Another great video! Pertaining to your video, I'm a "Sunny 11" kinda guy, as I've always found Sunny 16 to be too dark. Averaging multiple readings with a spot meter is a great way to determine a more "accurate" exposure, but only in circumstances "when" you have the time and patience to do so. It stands to reason that the more spot readings you can average, the more "accurate" your exposure will be, providing you are averaging both highlight & shadow areas. My Sekonic will average up to 9 spot readings. But again, in reality, we may not have the time or "patience" to average that many readings! As such, I have found, in practice, that averaging "one" highlight & "one" shadow reading with a spot meter has always proven to be accurate and sufficient.
Thanks so much! We should start a Sunny-11 revolution! It just doesn't roll off the tongue as well :-) In regards to the averaging of the highlight and shadow exposures, I think you are 100% correct IF we do indeed pick the right ones to measure. But as I said, those are probably the easiest to identify. I tend to enjoy the multi-spot method when I don't want to take the time to try to discern the actual brightest and darkest area. So for me, multi-spot just enables my laziness. And I'm not sure what all the steps are with your Sekonic (jealous-btw), but multi-spot is super fast when implemented in-camera. All this being said, I do tend to rely on my spotmeter's highlight and shadow "averaging" more than any other method. That works well 95% of the time. And the only time it's not a perfect choice is when the contrast range is enormous. But even then it's not really bad.
My Sekonic is an L-758DR, which is an older, outdated model - basically an incident meter with a built-in 1 degree spot meter. I paid about $650 for it new, and see them now on Ebay for just about the same amount. The current model is the L-858D, which is basically the same meter, only with more modern touch screens than buttons. The SOP on the Sekonic Spot meter is very basic and straight forward - you take as many readings as you want (up to nine), saving each one as you go. Then press the Average button for the averaged result. Afterwords, you simply press the Memory Clear button to clear out all the current readings. The meter also has a "Mid Tone" button, which will identify Zone V, and can then indicate the distance away from the mid tone for any further readings.
That is def a top-tier instrument. The end-all, be-all of metering. I’ve seen some of those prices, and they’re right scary. But at least now I know why.
I used incident light metering most of the time if it was possible, if not I did measure the reflected light. I have the excellent Gossen Variosix F2 which have a 5 degrees "spot" that can be attached, earlier I used a Quamtum Calcu-Light, all my Weston Master light meters do not work any more. For a short time I had a Sekonic L-448 Studio-Auto II, but that did not work proper, so I returned it.
Another great instructive video. I'm a believer in the Zone system. Wish I had seen your video back when. I finally bought a Soligor (like a Pentax) Spot-Meter and got a sticker off ebay to put on it marking the zones. Now it is so simple to move my Zone 5 reading over to Zone 3 and read the aper/speed settings from the meter. My BW photos have gotten much better because of this. Would like to see you do a follow-up on the increase/decrease in development times. That would be great.
Many thanks! And probably is worth a follow up regarding development adjustments for reducing/increasing contrast. And would be a good reason to put that 4x5 to work. So noted….
Modern mirroless cameras feature a 1/16000s and even 1/32000s when using the electronic shutter. I already know all the tricks with exposure because i startet photography in 1974, but i find your video very good and educational for people with less experience! Best regards from Vienna, Karl
Yes, the modern electronic shutters are really a game-changer. I had no idea they were capable of such high speeds, though. Incredible! Thanks so much for watching!
Maybe a thing you missed, the Minolta Spotmeter F - btw I got one after seeing your videos - has two other functions besides A average: S shadow and H highlights- I start to use them but mainly the Shadow - the Spot meter recalculate the value from zone 5 to zone 3 when you press the S button ( the same with Highlights button from 5 to 7 ) I got really nice results- / Danilo
YES! Thanks for bringing that up. I did overlook that. That is another really handy feature of the Minolta meter. Minolta actually put that into their Maxxum 9000 camera, too. Cheers!
Zone Metering. *insert expletive to taste*. Game changer. This will be hugely helpful for the stuff I do. Oh and can you please do a run down of that beautiful large format camera?
Very informative and interesting as always ... but I am still wondering about the metering patterns available on modern digital cameras and how thy actually are (supposed) to work ... I am sure that Nikon, Sony, et al spend a lot of research to make these work satisfactory. These methods were available on their film cameras as well as current digital cameras. Maybe a bit of discussion of all of the modes other than the obvious spot and center weighted modes. Thanks for your youtube videos ... keep up the good work!
Thanks! And thanks for the suggestion. Maybe an evolution of in-camera metering type of thing, and explaining the different patterns. I think I’ll add that to the list!
My Bronica ETRSi can do 1/500 (no internal meter, and I don't have the metered prism). My Nikon F3 can do 1/2000. And well, my Nikon Z 9 can do 1/32000. All wonderful and beautiful tools. Understanding the science and mechanics is critical to use our tools correctly. Thank you for sharing your knowledge!
I think what's really important in 2024 is photoshop and light room IS the dark room. For all my portraits on film I'm always adjusting subject/backgrounds like burning and dodging on a print. Same exact thing. These days even in straight sun I'll shoot most portraits at 5.6 just for specific shadow details on the skin. My work has improved radically just basically exposing for the darkest part from a meter reading and taking it one step down. I use a astrihori and what ever it reads I'll just -1 it for example a 5.6 1/125 reading I'll just 1/60 it these days. Most of the time I don't really meter much anymore unless the light is stupid crazy or crazy dark then it's usually 2.8 at 1/60 anyways
I know that is indeed the case for me. I’d love to have a darkroom to make traditional prints. But I seriously doubt I could produce one as good as I can do in Photoshop. And as for metering, the “expose for the shadows” technique is hardly ever a bad move. Thanks for sharing your method. We should all give that a shot. Thanks for watching!
Can I add another one I picked up, especially useful for those high contrast scenes. Meter the sky at 90 degrees to the sun if you have a clear view of the sky. Blue sky turns mid grey, clouds come out textured white, reflections are tamed. I live in Scotland, the sky is a giant grey card most of the time, so it also works for overcast skies.
Should be a piece of cake - especially if you go the route of setting the shadows at zone 3. Meter what you think the important shadow area is, then set the exposure to underexpose that by two stops.
Hello I'm from France, and i'm an amateur film photographer, only black and white. I've learn the process of developping and making some print in the dark room with a professionnal in Paris (a gift from my wife). I was a very beginner when I got this little training. But time passes, and now it's been 4 years and I got my own little Darkroom in the garage near my house. Metering for a black a white film is such a deeper thing that what i was expecting in the first place. When I started to opeing some books (like the basic manual of black and white photography, 2nd edition from Henry Horenstein), I've stumble upon a rabbit hole. What kind of meter should I use ? What should I do when the contrast of the subject is too bland ? too harsh ? What should I meter for ? How can I make the highlights on the negative more dense without making the black too dark ? What is the true meaning of "expose for the shadows, developp for the highlights" ? I've heard this sentence many time on YT, but i've yet to found someone that can clearly explain this meaning as a WHOLE. And books, when well writen are very usefull for that. Anyway, I really like watching your videos, I feel like you got many things to share, it sounds like you got experience. Keep going ! top quality. Take care
Thanks so much for the kind words! And congratulations on putting together a darkroom so you can experience the entire process. I enjoy shooting film for many reasons, but the “process” is near the top for me. The process and everything it entails. And black and white photography has nuances that color film and processing just don’t provide. It will always be my favorite medium. You’ll find there is always something to learn and explore. Thanks for watching!
Hope it was helpful! As for online classes…I currently don’t, but I’ve been considering it. But you can reach me at vintagecameradigest@gmail.com with any questions. More than happy to clarify anything or explain further.
One other point - it seems like you really need to have an odd number of zones (9 or 11) in order for Zone 5 to physically be in the middle. With an even number of Zones, your Zone 5 is going to bias itself to either Zone 4 or 6.
Yes, it does seem that would be the case. Unless - after all these years of believing it to be so - “middle” gray is just a misnomer, and it actually does skew one way or the other. When studying up on the Zone System, I was referencing a book from the 1980s. It defined the zones as 0-9 - which means 5 can’t really be in the middle. And it seems the 11-zone system (0-10) is a more recent application of the over-arching principles? I don’t know. But the fact that there is some disagreement over the number of actual zones is a little worrying, I’d say.
Dear sir, thank you for this video. Lovely bridge by the way. So what I can't get my head around is: So if you measure a zone 3 spot, it will give you zone 5 metering; so you underexpose 2 stops. But then you say you have to under develop the film. But that would put your zone 7 in zone 5. Shouldn't we over develop the film pushing it back into zone 7? Regards, Mac
Excellent question. As much as we'd like to think that the Zone System is a bullet-proof technique, at the metering level at least, it's going to "point you in the right direction" at best. When you add the development process, it's not as clear-cut. And there are some very smart Zone System wizards out there that will tell you straight up that equating each zone to an individual "stop" of light is not really the way it works. However, when METERING, that is exactly how we tend to look at it. Regarding development, though, the key is to understand how the negative is affected by development time. Shadow areas will reach their maximum density and stop - regardless of how much time you add to the process. So Zones 0-4, let's say, aren't affected much by over-development. They are what they are. The higher zones, though, are absolutely affected by development time. The more time you give it, the more density builds up. So, what you're doing by increased dev time is really just increasing the overall contrast. The shadow areas remain much the same while the highlights get brighter and brighter. Taking a look at the result on the bridge photo after assigning the shadow I picked to Zone 3 showed the upper mid-tones stretching into higher zones than I would have liked. The overall contrast (brightest white to darkest black) is just too much. So, a shorter development time (as I referred to above) won't affect the shadows as much as the highlights. The shadows stay relatively the same, just the upper zones are shifted down. And the uppermost zones are the most affected by this decrease in time. Contrast is reduced as the result. This is exactly what happens when push-processing film. The shadow areas are the least affected. The highlights become more dense. If there wasn't enough exposure to record good shadow detail to begin with, push-processing isn't going to fix that. What you will get is an image with a lot more contrast. Shadow areas stay dark, but the highlights get more and more dense. Add to all of this that your choice of film will also play a huge part in how the negative develops. I was using Kentmere 100 for these tests because it's what I had on hand. I know from previous testing that Kentmere has a tendency to shift mid-tones toward the high end of the scale. And its negatives show an obvious density increase over other films of the same ISO. So, I could also (probably) change the entire result by using FP4 or similar. I'm guessing that the overall contrast would have been more workable. Even though the Kentmere result wasn't too bad once I was able to do a little tweaking. I hope this helps. The key is to always shoot so that you get good shadow detail without overexposing everything. Then you can adjust contrast by development and/or printing. Thanks again for the excellent question!
Man, I'm so glad to have recently discovered this channel! Finally, a photography-related channel hosted by someone who isn't a douchey-artsy neo-Euro wannabe; and who isn't hawking a bunch of merchandise! Thank you!!!! THIS is what I've been looking for.
Glad to have you aboard! And thanks for watching!
This video is gold. Extremely well explained, suoer visual, and with good examples. Subscribed!
So glad you found it helpful! And thanks for the sub!
Great content 📸
Many, many thanks! So appreciated!
Thanks!
Many, many thanks! This will go toward more film! 🙏🏼
As a ( very) old photographer may I compliment you on this explanation of metering and the zone system. The latter, is, I sometimes feel, made unnecessarily complex by some writers. This is one of the best that I have seen. Very enjoyable on top of that. Personally I only use film, as, I have seldom used anything else . I suppose I simply dislike computerised images, I am quite capable of buggering up my own photographs without the aid of a computer. In any event thank you for all your work. Best wishes from England
Many thanks for the kind words! Just hearing the words “Zone System” used to scare me, I’ll admit. And I guess it can get quite technical when you include the development and printing methods. But for metering, I was surprised at how un-complicated it could be. Now, I’m thinking about doing an episode on the development adjustments. I’m sure I’d learn a lot in the process. Honestly, I tend to learn something new every time I do one of these. Lots of stuff I discover along the way. And lot’s of ideas come from comments. I appreciate you watching! Cheers!
I agree. Watched it all the way through.
This and the first video are very worth while and should be watched by every photographer who is just starting out.
Thanks for the kind words!
Just finished watching your two videos on metering and I must say they are the best I have seen on this subject. It’s has great examples and covers the topic very well. Thank you for your time and effort in producing this video.
Thanks so much! I do appreciate it!
Thank you so much for this. I have been on a journey to teach myself about exposure and this is the best explanation by far. Your guide to the zone system is invaluable. I will be using this as I practice.
Awesome! Glad you found this helpful. “Proper” exposure has always been an enigma of sorts. Thus all the different methods of going about it. I used to be 100% for incident metering. But, like just about anything, dealing in absolutes isn’t always the best route. Have fun on your journey and don’t hesitate to reach out with any questions! Thanks for watching!
Man this is the best video ever on metering. You are my light.
So glad it was helpful! And that's quite the compliment :-)
A very good question to camera producers would be”why did you privilege the development of matrix for film and digital, and not multiple spot metering?” I’m sure more pictures in the world would have been exposed better. lol
That’s a very astute observation. Why, indeed? I’ll hazard a guess and say it came down to economics. The multi-spot is very similar to Matrix. The main difference being with MS, the photographer chooses the measuring areas. But perhaps the accuracy didn’t outweigh the costs? I don’t know. I’ve definitely had bad exposures in cameras with matrix metering, but hardly ever using one with multi-spot.
Excellent! Thank you very much for being so clear and complete with the right examples. I have the Minolta 8000i with the spot measurement card, but I have never used it because it did not come with a manual. I am going to try it, although of course with film the trial and error is not as easy as with digital cameras.
The trial and error is certainly not as affordable as with digital, to be sure. I find that using the multi-spot feature is generally fool-proof though. I think you’ll have good luck with it. Cheers!
Every time a watch a video of you I learn something, even when I think I already have covered the topic. Thank you. And I like your dialect.
I appreciate that, and I’m glad you enjoy the content. Also glad my accent is bearable :-)) Thanks for watching!
Metering is definitely needed whether in film or digital photography
Absolutely!
Bravo, this is really the best explanation for light measuring with samples I had ever watched.
Many, many thanks! And thanks for watching!
Maybe make a video on how to add ND filters to the equation. Great video.
Agreed. Or just adding ANY filter to the equation, tbh. I started to include something along those lines, but talked myself out of it. So there’s still room for another sequel!
@@vintagecameradigestYes, exactly, like a red or yellow filter.
Another great video Steven! I’ve recently entered the world of external metering and your guidance is going to be a great help 👍
Thanks so much! And best of luck!
Great lecture! Wish I had met you back when I was teaching photography, what a team we would have made!
That would’ve been a LOT of fun, no doubt! Hope you’re doing well, my friend!
Incredible video once again! Thank you so much for the River of information you teach🙏🏼
You’re too kind :-) but many thanks. Hope it will be helpful!
This took me a step closer to meter light properly
Glad it was helpful! And thanks for watching!
Very thorough and very well received. This is precisely what I needed to know. Thank you and I am now a subscriber to your channel and am looking forward to seeing more about film photography.
Awesome, thank you!
I thoroughly enjoyed this video. I have a Minolta Flashmeter V with a spot meter attachment. I haven't figured out exactly how to work it. I will definitely break it out again. I have been meaning to do a video myself with my 8000i Mir or my 9. You've inspired me.
Excellent! I’d love to see either of those in action. The Mir is certainly an eye-catching camera. And I’ve been playing around with the idea of picking up a 9 for a while now. Thanks for watching!
Thank you for an interesting and relaxing video. It’s presented in such a calm and measured fashion. I think you’ve done a good job of conveying a basic understanding of the zone system . I’ll keep this saved as a reference point on that
Thanks so much! Behind the scenes isn't always so calm :-)
@@vintagecameradigest you’re welcome. As the presenter / host you achieved the result of PRESENTING it calmly, you got to that end result so that’s fine . P.S. I was glad to see the Minolta in action with the spot metering card. I have seen so intruded by them that I’ve bought a little group of the cards and am still on the hunt for a decent camera body
Yes, that expansion card in particular has got to be Minolta’s best-kept secret - for better or worse. I acquired a few different ones, myself. And I’m sure it’s gimmicky/kitschy, but I’m really interested in what the “Fantasy” card will do. Have yet to try it, tho.
@@vintagecameradigest I’ve managed to get multi spot , fantasy, exposure bracket and sport action
Another excellent and comprehensive video. A lot to take in, but showing the results really helps. Thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it! Many, many thanks!
Another great video! Pertaining to your video, I'm a "Sunny 11" kinda guy, as I've always found Sunny 16 to be too dark.
Averaging multiple readings with a spot meter is a great way to determine a more "accurate" exposure, but only in circumstances "when" you have the time and patience to do so.
It stands to reason that the more spot readings you can average, the more "accurate" your exposure will be, providing you are averaging both highlight & shadow areas. My Sekonic will average up to 9 spot readings. But again, in reality, we may not have the time or "patience" to average that many readings! As such, I have found, in practice, that averaging "one" highlight & "one" shadow reading with a spot meter has always proven to be accurate and sufficient.
Thanks so much! We should start a Sunny-11 revolution! It just doesn't roll off the tongue as well :-)
In regards to the averaging of the highlight and shadow exposures, I think you are 100% correct IF we do indeed pick the right ones to measure. But as I said, those are probably the easiest to identify. I tend to enjoy the multi-spot method when I don't want to take the time to try to discern the actual brightest and darkest area. So for me, multi-spot just enables my laziness. And I'm not sure what all the steps are with your Sekonic (jealous-btw), but multi-spot is super fast when implemented in-camera.
All this being said, I do tend to rely on my spotmeter's highlight and shadow "averaging" more than any other method. That works well 95% of the time. And the only time it's not a perfect choice is when the contrast range is enormous. But even then it's not really bad.
My Sekonic is an L-758DR, which is an older, outdated model - basically an incident meter with a built-in 1 degree spot meter. I paid about $650 for it new, and see them now on Ebay for just about the same amount. The current model is the L-858D, which is basically the same meter, only with more modern touch screens than buttons. The SOP on the Sekonic Spot meter is very basic and straight forward - you take as many readings as you want (up to nine), saving each one as you go. Then press the Average button for the averaged result. Afterwords, you simply press the Memory Clear button to clear out all the current readings.
The meter also has a "Mid Tone" button, which will identify Zone V, and can then indicate the distance away from the mid tone for any further readings.
That is def a top-tier instrument. The end-all, be-all of metering. I’ve seen some of those prices, and they’re right scary. But at least now I know why.
I used incident light metering most of the time if it was possible, if not I did measure the reflected light. I have the excellent Gossen Variosix F2 which have a 5 degrees "spot" that can be attached, earlier I used a Quamtum Calcu-Light, all my Weston Master light meters do not work any more. For a short time I had a Sekonic L-448 Studio-Auto II, but that did not work proper, so I returned it.
I need to look at the Gossen. Sounds pretty nice!
@@vintagecameradigest I can hghly recommend Gossen Light Meters, just do not get the older version with analog needle.
So noted! Thanks!
Another great instructive video. I'm a believer in the Zone system. Wish I had seen your video back when. I finally bought a Soligor (like a Pentax) Spot-Meter and got a sticker off ebay to put on it marking the zones. Now it is so simple to move my Zone 5 reading over to Zone 3 and read the aper/speed settings from the meter. My BW photos have gotten much better because of this. Would like to see you do a follow-up on the increase/decrease in development times. That would be great.
Many thanks! And probably is worth a follow up regarding development adjustments for reducing/increasing contrast. And would be a good reason to put that 4x5 to work. So noted….
Fantastic video!!!
Many thanks!
Very thorough explanation. Thanks for sharing
My pleasure!
Well done. Saved to Favorites.
Thank you! And thanks for watching!
Modern mirroless cameras feature a 1/16000s and even 1/32000s when using the electronic shutter. I already know all the tricks with exposure because i startet photography in 1974, but i find your video very good and educational for people with less experience! Best regards from Vienna, Karl
Yes, the modern electronic shutters are really a game-changer. I had no idea they were capable of such high speeds, though. Incredible! Thanks so much for watching!
This was an excellent video!!
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!
Maybe a thing you missed, the Minolta Spotmeter F - btw I got one after seeing your videos - has two other functions besides A average: S shadow and H highlights- I start to use them but mainly the Shadow - the Spot meter recalculate the value from zone 5 to zone 3 when you press the S button ( the same with Highlights button from 5 to 7 ) I got really nice results- / Danilo
YES! Thanks for bringing that up. I did overlook that. That is another really handy feature of the Minolta meter. Minolta actually put that into their Maxxum 9000 camera, too. Cheers!
Zone Metering. *insert expletive to taste*. Game changer. This will be hugely helpful for the stuff I do. Oh and can you please do a run down of that beautiful large format camera?
Excellent! So glad it's helpful. I do need to get out with that LF and shoot. I've been neglecting it, sadly.
I’d also like to see that as well as more about your Bronica. Is that an S2a? Thanks!
Very informative and interesting as always ... but I am still wondering about the metering patterns available on modern digital cameras and how thy actually are (supposed) to work ... I am sure that Nikon, Sony, et al spend a lot of research to make these work satisfactory. These methods were available on their film cameras as well as current digital cameras. Maybe a bit of discussion of all of the modes other than the obvious spot and center weighted modes. Thanks for your youtube videos ... keep up the good work!
Thanks! And thanks for the suggestion. Maybe an evolution of in-camera metering type of thing, and explaining the different patterns. I think I’ll add that to the list!
My Bronica ETRSi can do 1/500 (no internal meter, and I don't have the metered prism). My Nikon F3 can do 1/2000. And well, my Nikon Z 9 can do 1/32000. All wonderful and beautiful tools. Understanding the science and mechanics is critical to use our tools correctly. Thank you for sharing your knowledge!
Holy mackerel - 1/32000! I mean, I know that is one FINE camera, but I had no idea that was possible. I love it when I learn something new! Cheers!
I think what's really important in 2024 is photoshop and light room IS the dark room. For all my portraits on film I'm always adjusting subject/backgrounds like burning and dodging on a print. Same exact thing. These days even in straight sun I'll shoot most portraits at 5.6 just for specific shadow details on the skin. My work has improved radically just basically exposing for the darkest part from a meter reading and taking it one step down. I use a astrihori and what ever it reads I'll just -1 it for example a 5.6 1/125 reading I'll just 1/60 it these days. Most of the time I don't really meter much anymore unless the light is stupid crazy or crazy dark then it's usually 2.8 at 1/60 anyways
I know that is indeed the case for me. I’d love to have a darkroom to make traditional prints. But I seriously doubt I could produce one as good as I can do in Photoshop. And as for metering, the “expose for the shadows” technique is hardly ever a bad move. Thanks for sharing your method. We should all give that a shot. Thanks for watching!
Can I add another one I picked up, especially useful for those high contrast scenes. Meter the sky at 90 degrees to the sun if you have a clear view of the sky. Blue sky turns mid grey, clouds come out textured white, reflections are tamed.
I live in Scotland, the sky is a giant grey card most of the time, so it also works for overcast skies.
Thank you for this info! I’ve never heard of this one, but now I’m anxious to try it. I love learning new things!
Great video. Now I'm trying to figure out how I can use the spotmeter setting in my Minolta a7 to use the zone system...
Should be a piece of cake - especially if you go the route of setting the shadows at zone 3. Meter what you think the important shadow area is, then set the exposure to underexpose that by two stops.
I will give that a try. Thanks!
Hello
I'm from France, and i'm an amateur film photographer, only black and white. I've learn the process of developping and making some print in the dark room with a professionnal in Paris (a gift from my wife). I was a very beginner when I got this little training. But time passes, and now it's been 4 years and I got my own little Darkroom in the garage near my house.
Metering for a black a white film is such a deeper thing that what i was expecting in the first place. When I started to opeing some books (like the basic manual of black and white photography, 2nd edition from Henry Horenstein), I've stumble upon a rabbit hole.
What kind of meter should I use ? What should I do when the contrast of the subject is too bland ? too harsh ? What should I meter for ? How can I make the highlights on the negative more dense without making the black too dark ? What is the true meaning of "expose for the shadows, developp for the highlights" ? I've heard this sentence many time on YT, but i've yet to found someone that can clearly explain this meaning as a WHOLE.
And books, when well writen are very usefull for that.
Anyway, I really like watching your videos, I feel like you got many things to share, it sounds like you got experience.
Keep going ! top quality.
Take care
Thanks so much for the kind words! And congratulations on putting together a darkroom so you can experience the entire process. I enjoy shooting film for many reasons, but the “process” is near the top for me. The process and everything it entails. And black and white photography has nuances that color film and processing just don’t provide. It will always be my favorite medium. You’ll find there is always something to learn and explore. Thanks for watching!
Thanks so much for this. I have been kind of zoned out on trying to meter for years. Do you have online classes?
Hope it was helpful! As for online classes…I currently don’t, but I’ve been considering it. But you can reach me at vintagecameradigest@gmail.com with any questions. More than happy to clarify anything or explain further.
One other point - it seems like you really need to have an odd number of zones (9 or 11) in order for Zone 5 to physically be in the middle. With an even number of Zones, your Zone 5 is going to bias itself to either Zone 4 or 6.
Yes, it does seem that would be the case. Unless - after all these years of believing it to be so - “middle” gray is just a misnomer, and it actually does skew one way or the other. When studying up on the Zone System, I was referencing a book from the 1980s. It defined the zones as 0-9 - which means 5 can’t really be in the middle. And it seems the 11-zone system (0-10) is a more recent application of the over-arching principles? I don’t know. But the fact that there is some disagreement over the number of actual zones is a little worrying, I’d say.
Dear sir, thank you for this video. Lovely bridge by the way.
So what I can't get my head around is:
So if you measure a zone 3 spot, it will give you zone 5 metering; so you underexpose 2 stops.
But then you say you have to under develop the film. But that would put your zone 7 in zone 5. Shouldn't we over develop the film pushing it back into zone 7?
Regards,
Mac
Excellent question. As much as we'd like to think that the Zone System is a bullet-proof technique, at the metering level at least, it's going to "point you in the right direction" at best. When you add the development process, it's not as clear-cut. And there are some very smart Zone System wizards out there that will tell you straight up that equating each zone to an individual "stop" of light is not really the way it works. However, when METERING, that is exactly how we tend to look at it.
Regarding development, though, the key is to understand how the negative is affected by development time. Shadow areas will reach their maximum density and stop - regardless of how much time you add to the process. So Zones 0-4, let's say, aren't affected much by over-development. They are what they are. The higher zones, though, are absolutely affected by development time. The more time you give it, the more density builds up. So, what you're doing by increased dev time is really just increasing the overall contrast. The shadow areas remain much the same while the highlights get brighter and brighter.
Taking a look at the result on the bridge photo after assigning the shadow I picked to Zone 3 showed the upper mid-tones stretching into higher zones than I would have liked. The overall contrast (brightest white to darkest black) is just too much. So, a shorter development time (as I referred to above) won't affect the shadows as much as the highlights. The shadows stay relatively the same, just the upper zones are shifted down. And the uppermost zones are the most affected by this decrease in time. Contrast is reduced as the result.
This is exactly what happens when push-processing film. The shadow areas are the least affected. The highlights become more dense. If there wasn't enough exposure to record good shadow detail to begin with, push-processing isn't going to fix that. What you will get is an image with a lot more contrast. Shadow areas stay dark, but the highlights get more and more dense.
Add to all of this that your choice of film will also play a huge part in how the negative develops. I was using Kentmere 100 for these tests because it's what I had on hand. I know from previous testing that Kentmere has a tendency to shift mid-tones toward the high end of the scale. And its negatives show an obvious density increase over other films of the same ISO. So, I could also (probably) change the entire result by using FP4 or similar. I'm guessing that the overall contrast would have been more workable. Even though the Kentmere result wasn't too bad once I was able to do a little tweaking.
I hope this helps. The key is to always shoot so that you get good shadow detail without overexposing everything. Then you can adjust contrast by development and/or printing. Thanks again for the excellent question!