Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Metering highlights revisited.... bracketing
From: "Joseph Codispoti" <joecodi@thegrid.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 15:08:17 -0800

I second Duane’s philosophy about limiting bracketing to certain stationary
and or contrasty subjects.
That is the very reason why I use a spot/incident/reflected meter- to
ascertain the exposure in advance and forgetting about it until lighting
conditions change.
Duane's words remind me of my first photographic lesson: I was 14 when I
purchased (after saving for it by spending only half of my lunch money for a
long time) a 120 Zeiss Ikon folding  camera. It did not have a built-in
meter and I could not afford one. In those days, meters where a luxury. I
exposed 3 rolls of film to test the camera and of the resulting 36
exposures, 32 or 33 where more than acceptable. I learned in that first
experience that trees (green) absorbs more light than other subjects,
therefore require a larger lens opening. Four years later I purchased a GE
meter and lost that intuitive or analytical eye for light because I was
relying blindly on the meter readings rather than interpreting them.
Now, in most cases, I do not bracket. I expose Kodachrome 25 and 64 and for
the most part my exposures are on target because I spend enough time
considering the lighting for contrast, quality, and intensity.
By paying attention to the light and interpreting what the meter reads, one
can arrive at the correct exposure withing a fraction of a stop.
Joseph