Re: Dr. T. gets "exposed"...

[P3D Dr. George A. Themelis <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>I think you do a disservice to beginners though if you tell them they 
>should be able to get perfect results without a meter.  

Perfect?  Who said "perfect"?  And is there such a thing as "perfect
results"?  Not for me...  I would just say "good results"... I believe
that you can get good results without a light meter.  I don't like
it when you call that "disservice to beginners" because 1) I have worked
hard all my life to get beginners interested in 3-d and 2) I have seen
plenty of satisfied beginners get good pictures using the "sunny day
rule ++" half page instructions that I provide.  Most beginners can
work these rules fine.  Many beginners (and some "advanced amateurs"
like Dr. T. ;) are not as perfectionists as you are ("Call me a
perfectionist, I won't argue") ;)

I don't think it helps to tell beginners that they can
only take good 3-d pictures if they use a light meter... because
many beginners do not have or cannot afford a light meter...
right from start... They can graduate to one later...

For many years I used the cheapest light meter available (only
reflected light) and that's all I needed.  When I bought it,
$50 was a considerable investment for me...

When, after years of service, this meter failed, I got a fancier one...
One day as I was using it, I thought to myslelf, "no, there cannot
be so much light around...".  I went ahead and followed the light
meter's suggestion and ended up with underexposed slides.  The
little diffuser had slipped off place and I was metering the sky...  

Come to think about it, I have only screwed up exposures when
I was following the light meter's suggestions, never when I was
shooting using my brain as a meter...

It pays to develop a sense of how much light is around...
This will never happen if you read the light meter for every
picture that you take...

IMO, George Themelis


------------------------------