Re: [Leica] Incident

[John Collier <jbcollier@home.com>]

    Well, as my father actually has a heart condition and my back just isn't
what it used to be, you are quite possibly right. However on the matter of
meter choice I think that you state your position a little strongly. I, and
I am sure you, do not find metering to be a rocket science. Now before we go
too far: yes, it is a poor metaphor as rocket science is not a particularly
subtle art. 
    When we go to make a photograph, we use a meter to evaluate the scene
(or to assist in the creation of the scene) to facilitate our previsualized
image. If we use a reflective meter, we sample a range of significant tones
and make an educated decision, adjusting exposure, materials, lighting and
if possible development (and sometimes expectations) to suit the contrast
range of the scene and fulfil the previsualized rendering of the final
image. If we use an incident meter, we measure the various light sources to
arrive at a contrast range and a mid-tone reading. We, by looking at the
scene, can evaluate the various tones and follow the same procedure, mixing
experience and knowledge, (as in reflective) to achieve the desired result.
    As you can easily see by my descriptions, each meter has its pluses and
minuses that can be exploited/overcome by experience. If you are strict zone
photographer and can either carry enough bodies or restrict yourself to
scenes that require only one development, then a narrow range reflective
meter is for you. If you are a street shooter and depend on quick reflexes
and a wide range of paper grades to achieve your results then a couple of
quick incident light/shadow (or reflective mid-tone) readings will be all
you need until light conditions change significantly. A studio photographer
will carefully construct and test a scene to achieve their image. Generally
they will use an incident meter to set up the lights (the all important
skin-tones) and buckets of Polaroids to make sure.
    Is the "zone" photographer the champ as they have the most control? Of
course not. Zoning is particularly unsuited to street shooting where emotion
and split second timing are more important than full technical realization
in the final print. HCB and Elliot Erwitt are good examples of this.  Is the
studio photographer the dummy as they double check everything and mostly use
an incident meter? When your reputation and bread and butter depend on the
results; when an art director, stylist, models and assistants are pushing
costs and expectations through the roof; when cameras sometimes fail in
subtle ways; you check, double check and run checks during the actual shoot.
    When AA went street shooting (not particularly good at it) he used a
spot meter to grab a quick mid-tone as this was the meter he was comfortable
with. He still was only after a mid-tone and could have easily used an
incident meter. AA's most famous image (moonrise) was shot with no exposure
meter at all; just a quick grab shot as the light was changing so rapidly.
When HCB was the flavor of the month in France, he was hired to do some
fashion work. I believe he climbed into the rafters and had the models
cavorting on the floor. I am sure he had very interesting images and set all
his exposures by experience; but, the fashion people did not come knocking
again. And last of all, former friends of mine once showed their wedding
pictures to me. It would be a good idea if we all sat down and took a deep
breath. Imagine if you will a beach scene, a couple walking hand and hand,
the wind gently tussling her skirt, a seagull just overhead, the sun casting
them in silhouette and all shot through 44 pairs of stocking and a orange
filter. They not only paid the photographer for this, they loved the result
as well!
    I use an incident meter to shoot mostly tranny film. I, when starting
out, used a spot meter almost exclusively. When I acquired an M camera, I
also acquired an incident meter and gradually have grow to only use this
combination as it suits my style of photography. I carry a spot attachment
for those rare occasions when I require one. I produce the results I want in
a predictable and methodical way and, best of all, I am very happy with the
technical side of my photography. I do not feel that my solutions are the
right and only way for anyone except myself. I make occasional forays into
other fields such as studio work and zone work and find it a fascinating
experience but prefer spontaneity to technical perfection. I think the
important thing is to use whatever you have as with (and only with)
experience, the meter will assume its rightful role as a guide not a
hindrance to photography

John Collier



> John Collier wrote
> 
>> So na na na na. My Dad can cream your dad any day!<

Rod graciously replied:
 
> But then I'm quite sure I can deal with both you and your father just on my
> lonesome.