[Leica] Ramblings

[ted grant <75501.3002@compuserve.com>]

Jeff S wrote:

<<<<<Certainly, there are situations in which a number of different
interpretations of a scene deserve a try, but where time allows, bracketing
seems a brute-force substitute for precise metering technique.>>


Sorry Jeff, Either I'm misinterpreting what you mean or you are wrong.

<<<but where time allows, bracketing seems a brute-force substitute for
precise metering technique>>>>

I can't agree with you on the precise metering technique, if by that you
mean only one exposure is necessary if precise metering is used.

It doesn't matter how many meter checks you do, each exposure will be
correct, but what that doesn't tell you is, exactly how a slide will look
if you underexpose 1-2-3 or more stops. You can imagine they will be
darker, but exactly how does the film re-act to the changing exposures is
something you can't tell until after processing.  I don't mean every
situation, but there are some with water, ice highlight scenes, boating,
skies to name a few. And no matter how diligent you are reading the meter
for the "correct exposure" which one will be the most exciting slide will
not be determined until they lie there on the table!

It is how the film appears under "bracketing" that often creates images
quite off the wall and awesome.  By the same token you have no idea what
they will look like until you spread them on the light table.

Of course this bracketing can be wasteful if one just burns film and
doesn't make any changes worth noting. 

Many "Stock Photography" shooters will expose a half dozen or more frames
of the exact same image on original film to avoid making dupes. It's faster
and allows to bracket for effect also, rather than relying on a dupe slide
that doesn't have the same re-production quality.

Film still is the cheapest commodity for major working photographers whose
airfares to remote corners of the world are astronomical. Not to bracket
and use a ton of film to cover every possiblity is tantamount to a crime.
Because who in their right mind wants to pay all the expenses for a re-turn
shoot because enough variations weren't attempted on the first go around!  

I know it sometimes doesn't make sense to amateurs why we use so much film
at times, but it can make or break the success of any shoot, providing you
make changes to exposures while bracketing.

I relate to film in the same manner as a writer starting to write a novel,
or a painter/artist beginning on a new canvas. They don't start out with
the idea of writing only 100 words or the painter with "I'm only going to
use 1 tube of paint"  You start and use everything required to achive a
successful project.

I never count rolls nor frames until a shoot is over and the costs are
being logged. Sometimes it's scary as hell, other times, "gee did we get
all that in on 200 rolls?"

Film has always been considered the least of concern for any assignment
I've done, as long as we have buckets of it available.

ted