[Leica] Fred Ward's mail about incident

["Fantoni, Ernesto" <Fantoni@PHIBRED.COM>]

John Mc Leod asked for Fred Ward's message about incident/reflected.
This is the message Fred sent to the LUG on May, 30th, 1997:

>>It must be time again for my annual discertation on reflected-light
metering, either by hand or in-camera.

Nothing in a Leica or in any other camera is inherently better or worse
than any other reflected-light meter (either hand-held or built into the
camera). 

All such devices are today some variant of a spot meter.... you get a
narrow angle reading.

All reflected-light readings are only approximations of a proper reading
for skin tones. If your subject is a gray card, you will get superb
results. If you are not photographing a gray card and want to photograph
a portrait or a general scene, then you will hit just about the right
exposure just about 80% of the time (according to most researchers who
test such arcane things). 

Leica is no better and no worse than anyone else with a through-the-lens
meter or with a meter sitting on top of the camera. In fact there is
nothing whatsoever unique or superior about the Leica metering concept.
(The cameras that are usually derided on this list, the Canon EOS and
Nikon SLR, actually have a far superior through-the-lens metering system
based on a computerized matrix that sense the individual aspects of
every shot.) The Leica metering concept is extremely simple, mundane,
workmanlike, and direct. It does the job, nothing more, nothing less.

The problem here is not Leica or anyone else. It is conceptual. The
photographic world long ago decided that the average scene in nature
reflects 18% of the light hitting it. So, camera manufacturers made and
make meters to measure for 18% reflectance. If you are lucky enough to
either happen on an 18% scene, or photograph gray cards (which are made
to be 18% reflective), then you get the right exposure. If not, then
your pictures will be over- or under-exposed. It cannot be otherwise. 

The clever, lucky, or skilled photographer will point his TTL or
attached meter to something he thinks is average in brightness. He will
avoid black or white objects. The amateur will point and shoot and hope
for the best. It is a testimonial to Kodak and Fuji that most of the
resulting images will be OK.... not great, but satisfactory.

(If you do not believe the above, then I suggest you use slide film and
take a TTL reading of a white wall and make a picture, then do the same
of a black wall and make a picture. And then take an incident light
reading and make the same two pictures. Once you do this and if accurate
exposures are important to you, those will be the last pictures you will
ever make by taking reflected light readings. The only way to get
professional exposure results day in and day out in every situation
except photographing stained-glass windows or other light-emitting
sources is to use a hand-held incident light meter.) 

For any old-timers on this list, this is my 1997 recitation of this
truism. You can relax and be sure you will not see this again until 1998
or beyond. 

Fred Ward<<

Best regards

Ernesto