RE: [Leica] metereless

["bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Let me give this a try - as a very non-technical guy -
What the incident reading will give you is a very accurate 18% gray
reading of an entire scene. That is, your negative's tonality will
accurately reflect the overall scene, and the contrasts between the
objects within the scene. If you take a reflected reading of the scene,
or even of a given object/person in the scene, the reading will be
skewed by the reflectance of the scene overall, or the object being
metered, and the negative of the entire scene will be thrown off.

So, yes, you're correct to a point - If you are taking an incident
reading of the light falling on a room in which you are photographing a
black cat, you may want to adjust a bit for the lack of reflectance of
the black cat. On the other hand, the incident reading will give you a
picture that shows you how black the cat looked in the given light.

Does any of that make sense?

B. D.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Andrew
Moore
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 11:47 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] metereless


> Don't think so, you're measuring the light that's falling onto an 
> object, not the light reflected from it.

That's exactly why I'm thinking the measurement still needs some
compensation -- you're measuring the light falling onto it.  However,
you're *not* measure the light that's reflected -- and after you take
the incident reading, the film (or sensor :) onto which you're recording
is in reflected light, not incident light.  The incident reading will
certainly be more accurate but might still need a tweak or two.

Maybe not, but it just seems logical to me.  Can anyone else comment on
this?

- --Andrew


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html