- This topic has 11 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 5 months ago by
.
-
Topic
-
-
Replies
-
Not Roger,
For me I’d probably decide my stop, IE. shooting at a 2-2.8. If I metered at a 8.0 then I’d have to ND until I achieved my T2.0.
I think what is more important is maintaining consistency throughout the day or over the course of several days. It may be overcast one day and a bright sunny day the next. Or maybe you want the look of a sunny day so your lighting department might have to recreate a sunny day on an overcast day.
A follow up question for you roger is how you create lighting depth that you want while shooting on overcast days as to not have a flat look IF you are trying to achieve something with more contrast?
I was actually more interested in how Roger would take meter readings for this scene. He’s mentioned how he takes a reading from both the highlight side and the shadow side of a scene, and then decides his T-stop from there. I’m just a little confused as the overcast sky acts as a huge bounce, and there really isn’t a shadow side – unless perhaps he takes a shadow side reading pointing the meter at the ground?
I still use a meter to judge my exposure, even with a calibrated monitor. I use a Gossen Luna Pro, usually with the invercone and in incident mode. For the shot your reference I would have stood where the actors are and pointed my meter towards the camera.
Thanks so much Roger! Very helpful.
Yes, this make sense, as the cone would be receiving light from the overcast sky(highlight side) and the illumination from the ground(shadow side) in the same proportion as the actor’s faces. cheers.Would you shoot it as it were though or were you working under a targeted stop for the scene? IE, if you wanted to shoot at a T2.8 but metered at an 8.0 (depending on camera settings) would you ND down to get your T2.8? Conversely if you wanted a 5.6 but metered at 2.8 are you bring in your lights to get your desired working stop? I’d be very surprised if you were shooting as it were from the meter.
Yes, I was trying to shoot at around 3.2/4.0. Not always possible as the light was so variable during long takes.
Yes, that would be tricky. Roger, in those cases of changing light, did you make an aperture pull, or just take what you got?
I still use a meter to judge my exposure, even with a calibrated monitor. I use a Gossen Luna Pro, usually with the invercone and in incident mode. For the shot your reference I would have stood where the actors are and pointed my meter towards the camera.
(sorry for going OT)
Would you suggest this meter for a beginner?
I searched for it on the web and, while I was expecting a super technological meter costing more than my car developped by NASA etc etc, i actually discovered that it’s usually sold for a few euros (that technically is still more than my car value, ah ah) , at least a second hand analogical version of it (I don’t know if it’s the same version you use but I didn’t find other ones of it).
I own one, mostly use as a backup to my Sekonic, but I think they are extremely easy to use, thanks to the fact that it uses a null (zeroing) system. You essentially get to see how far over/under exposure you want to be once your settings are set. It’s a bit chunky and if you’re used to using a Sekonic\Spectra where the dome is facing you, you have to hold the Gossen in a bit different of a way, then it’s pretty decent.
I would just make sure it’s calibrated to either a known calibrated meter or using Sunny 16 method.
Also make sure you’re getting the 9V battery one!
Thanks a lot Tyler! I am actually thinking about getting an entry level Sekonic meter, for my simple needs is more than enough (getting close to a decent exposure and learning a bit about lighting), but i was curious about this model Roger was talking about and in general the analogic ones, I find them a bit intimidating, ah ah!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.