Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/12/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hello, I always admired those guys who are confident in reliably estimating exposure without using a meter, at least with negative film. Moreover, I consider this ability as a precondition to actually enjoy using a M2, M3 or M4. Of course I looked at the little tables that come with most films or that are shown in older books on photography, but looking up tables is more annoying than using a handheld meter. Also, a have my fair share of experience in using the M6's coupled meter. As a result I am now quite confident in guestimating exposure indoor under artificial light and under the open sky. Apparently the architects of public buildings, department stores, offices, underground stations etc. follow certain engineering standards in lighting which usually result to something like a 1/60, f=1/2 with 400 ASA. Smaller offices with lower ceiling and bright lights. are rather in the 1/60, F=1/4 range. A living room or a pub may go down to 1/30 or 1/15 with f=1/1,4. Under open sky conditions I apply the "sunny 16" rule (1/500" with f=1/11, ASA 400). Depending on the clouds I may open the aperture by up to 4 stops. 1 or 2 hours after sunrise or until sunset, an additional correction by minus 1 or 2 stops seems to be necessary. But I have problems to estimate exposure in narrow, shady streets and for shadows in general. For a time I thought that a correction by minus 2 stops, in addition to the above, of course, would be the right approach, but to often this resulted in underexposure. Apparently, the indirect light depends to much on facade colour, height of buildings. I would therefore appreciate if I could share the experience of other LUGgers, particularly if there is someone who has a more systematic approach. Hans-Peter