P3D Dans CD / Light Meters

[Brad Richmond <galoot@xxxxxxxxx>]

(DDDelurking Mode ActivateDDD)
Hello 3d-ites,

First, I must add my compliments to Dan for his great CD. I have yet to
explore all of the links, but from what I have seen so far it is terrific!
Great job Dan, and great job to the many of you who have sites listed on
the CD. This was money well spent. I know I have hours of great, and fast
surfing ahead. Thanks Dan!

Dr. T wrote:
>My concern is that novices (like Dana, for example) might think that a
(usually expensive) 
>lightmeter is NECESSARY to take good stereo pictures (w/slide film) and
that misguided
>thought might prevent them from getting started in stereo.

I agree with George. I know this subject has been discussed often on the
list, but if you will forgive me, I would like to add some of my own
observations and _opinions_.

I am reminded of some pictures I took several years ago. The readings from
my light meter didn't seem quite right, but I trusted it anyway and didn't
even bracket. (I think I had the ASA incorrectly set) Consequently, I ended
up with some slides that were overexposed by at least 2 or 3 stops. Well
Duh!!! Another moment in history lost forever because I _relied_ on my
light meter without the "eyeball-brain-logic-experience interface".

After that, I decided it was time to learn the "sunny 16" rule. Now I
always estimate my exposures based on the tables (they are now in my head),
and then I might refer to the light meter as a reference. Based on the
meters reading, I might tweak the exposure a little, but generally find
that my original estimation is pretty darn close, especially in most common
lighting situations. It's become a little game I play.

The advantages of this method include:

1. I can shoot faster, with less hastle.
2. I have learned to read light much more accurately with my eyeballs.
3. If the meter shoots craps I am not stuck with a camera that can only be
used as a defensive weapon (yes, it's a Realist)
4. I have a much higher percentage of properly exposed pictures.
5. It's more rewarding (for me) to rely less on higher technology and more
on learned "windage" methods of exposure.
6. I more fully understand each of my cameras exposure intricacies. A
setting of 1/100th of a sec on one camera might actually be 1/90th, while
another camera may be closer to 1/120th. I am more "intimate" with my
Realist...no jokes please!
7. It is more liberating, and more fun.

I agree with the authors who suggest a good meter, I rarely leave home
without mine, since I might run into light that I just can't figure out.
There is also merit to those who suggest that you can get by without one.
The meter is a useful tool that I use to suppliment my learning and
experience, but I no longer feel that I cannot shoot my 3d's (or flats)
without one.

If you are new to stereo photography, and have a camera but no meter, learn
the sunny 16 rule and shoot a lot of pictures. Make notes to remember your
settings and learn how your camera performs in various lighting situations.
You will probably find that in a few rolls you are making good exposures
most of the time. When you have the extra money, go ahead and buy a
reliable light meter, but by then you will probably find that you will use
the meter as a reference tool rather than an absolute indicator.

Regards,
BraDDD DDD RichmonDDD  (Note: Three sets of 3D's...the ninth dimension?)

(Relurking Mode ActivateDDD)



 
 ---------------------------------
         Brad D. Richmond         
       Overland Park, Kansas      
     mailto:galoot@xxxxxxxxx      
  http://www.kcnet.com/~galoot 
 ---------------------------------


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