Re: [Leica] Incident

["Raimo Korhonen" <raimo.korhonen@pp2.inet.fi>]

Hi!
Hey guys - this is getting crazy - even crazier than I remembered. Maybe
IŽll go back to the Other List.
All the best!
Raimo
Photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen

- ----------
> From: John Collier <jbcollier@home.com>
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Incident
> Date: 24. joulukuuta 1999 16:47
> 
>     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.