Light Meters Still Relevant

FM Forums \| Lighting & Studio Techniques \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 end

Archive 2009 · Light Meters Still Relevant

pawlowski6132
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Are light meters still necessary in a studio setting with today's camera's say, a D700 and some ABs?

thanx!

Jul 03, 2009 at 03:16 AM

abdul10000
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Absolutely, how else are you going to be able to obtain the desired ratio from a three light setup for example?

Without a light meter you will have to spend allot of time taking many pictures to guess proper exposure. In the end you will never get the ratios right unless you are lucky that one time.

Light meters are absolutely imperative for professional work where accuracy and speed are the name of the game.

If you are considering a light meter the Sekonic 358 is an great meter with so many handy features and options. It goes for about $250 if I am not mistaken.

Jul 03, 2009 at 04:13 AM

Carlton Beener
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Light Meters Still Relevant

In b4 Chuck's white towel.

I actually think light meters are still very relevant. I find it much easier to use a light meter and measure all my lights individually ( I have elinchrom's and the skyport system) while being able to adjust each light .1 stop up or down from the meter. It's much faster than setting them, running to the camera, taking a shot, adjusting them etc. I can get the exact setting I want much faster that way.

Jul 03, 2009 at 05:13 AM

Carmen Miranda
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Yep, and I won't be getting rid of mine anytime soon. I don't use it all the time, but I'm always glad it's there.

Do a search, there has been much written on this subject.

Good luck.

Jul 03, 2009 at 05:33 AM

Garry Burton
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Light meters are relevant, yes 100%.
Light hasn't changed because of the digital format only the tool with use to capture it.

I use mine regularly (Sekonic 358 like most I suspect that use them) no matter how many times I've set a situtaion. Yes, I should know my ratios and settings and I do but equipment degrades (flash bulbs, diffuser might of fallen off it's velcro/attachment) and I'm aware of all of this plus getting my exposures spot on.

Do you really need to spend anymore time in software land fixing poor exposures?

Yes, you can you use a towel but I find a meter a lot handier than a cloths line in my pocket.

Still this argument will go on just as long as the Windows v Mac, Nikon v Canon, RAW v JPEG, Lightroom v Aperture, Zoom v Prime punch ups.

What ever rocks your boat.

Cheers Gaz

Jul 03, 2009 at 08:27 AM

Conner999
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Without question.

Jul 03, 2009 at 11:23 AM

Daan B
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Light Meters Still Relevant

pawlowski6132 wrote:
Are light meters still necessary in a studio setting with today's camera's say, a D700 and some ABs?

thanx!

Why not

Jul 03, 2009 at 11:41 AM

stevensdot
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · Light Meters Still Relevant

If you use assistants certainly ... makes them feel better!

Jul 03, 2009 at 12:55 PM

butchM
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · Light Meters Still Relevant

pawlowski6132 wrote:
Are light meters still necessary in a studio setting with today's camera's say, a D700 and some ABs?

thanx!

Absolutely they are relevant ... Even though the latest DSLRs have very good LCD screens and several modes to evaluate lighting, it's so much easier to set your ratios and and adjust your lighting via a hand held meter in the studio and on location ... once you become familiar with your meter ... you know the light is going to be right the first time you press the shutter release ... takes out all or at least most of the guess work.

Jul 03, 2009 at 01:38 PM

cgardner
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Meters and the camera feedback are both useful tools. The problem from the standpoint of the photographer is understanding how to use the tools then picking the best one for each job.

A hand held meter out of the box will not produce accurate results unless the camera's actual ISO and meter ISO are EXACTLY there are no factors the meter can't measure, such as lens flare, affecting the exposure. The process of matching meter to camera is like sighting in a new gun. You aim at the center of the target then see if the bullet actually hits it. If not you adjust the sight until it does.

So you meter the lights by pointing the dome at the camera (the way the manual instructs) and the display says f/8. You set the camera to f/8 and your file looks underexposed. That would indicate your camera's actual ISO differs from the ISO standard of the meter. Canon bodies are typically about 1/3 different. So like sighting in the gun what you need to is shoot a target over a range of exposure in 1/3 increments from f/5.6 to f/11 and then look at the files in ACR or whatever application is used for correcting RAW to find the optimal exposure.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

That's where the infamous "Chuck Gardner White Towel" enters the equation. Some objective standard for when exposure is correct is needed. Since digital files must be exposed for highlight detail a white towel is the ideal test object. Its better than a white card because the texture of the fabric makes it very easy to see visually, with just ocular inspection, when detail robbing overexposure is clipping. The shot above is from my L-358 calibration test. I shot the bracketed series and found a file with 1/3 stop more exposure than the meter indicated reproduced the towel (and everything else) more accurately.

Back in the days before instant feedback a well calibrated meter, and generous bracketing, was vital to success. But today we have other tools and I think its rather silly not to use them. There are some things a hand held meter can't account for, such as the effect of lens flare, so to my way of thinking the best measure of exposure is the last photo the camera took. The camera sensor becomes the light meter. Who can argue anything could be more accurate?

Again as with the meter the key is learning to operate the tool correctly. The feedback I find most valuable for exposure is the over-exposure warning which shows when, and more importantly where clipping of the highlights is occurring. To interpret the results on the camera display you need to perform the same type of calibration exercise with a target like the towel. Shoot the towel over a range of apertures then look at the files in the RAW editor to find the optimally exposed one. Then go back to the camera and look at the same sequence with the overexposure warning on. Find the frame that looked optimally exposed in the RAW editor and not how the overexposure warning is displaying it. I find that when the camera playback just starts to reveal clipping in the playback the RAW capture is optimally exposed. YMMV but if you do that simple test then you'll be able to set exposure very accurately simply by looking at the clipping warning.

Once you grasp how the clipping warning works with the towel (or subject highlights) you can even use the camera to set lighting ratios. Want a 3:1 ratio with fill set at f/5.6 and key light at f/8? Put a towel where the subject's face will be, turn on just the fill light, set your camera to f/5.6 and adjust power until you barely see clipping in the over-exposure warning. Turn off the fill, change camera aperture to f/8 and then turn on the key light, raising its power until the towel barely clips. For exposure setting turn on both lights. The towel will clip, so adjust the aperture (not the light power) until the clipping disappears.

Mind you setting ratios that way is not as convenient as with a meter, but in practical terms when setting up the look and mood of the lighting most experienced shooters rely on proportional modeling lights not numerical ratios set with a meter. That being the case is possible to set the lights by eye, then "meter" exposure using the over-exposure warning. It even works on white backgrounds...

I start with the background lights off and adjust exposure via the over-exposure warning to keep the brightest highlight (created with the back rim light) just below the point of clipping.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Then once the foreground is set I turn on the background lights and adjust them until the the background is just below the brightness of the rim-lighting in the foreground to maintain the visual separation of tone.

This image is copyrighted by the owner

That level of nuance in exposure is very difficult with a hand held incident meter but simple using the camera playback.

Having mastered both tools and methods for setting ratios and exposures I find the meter more convenient for doing the "rough framing" of my lighting set-ups but rely on the camera feedback to make the final adjustments. I use what I have found to be the best tool for each task. In the event that my meter died it might slow things down by a few minutes during the initial step-up phase, but wouldn't be a show stopper.

Chuck

Jul 03, 2009 at 04:26 PM

sherijohnson
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · Light Meters Still Relevant

pawlowski6132 wrote:
Are light meters still necessary in a studio setting with today's camera's say, a D700 and some ABs?

thanx!

I never even owned a light meter till recently when I got some mono lights, without a meter, I would have never been able to get the right exposure settings without major trial and error. As soon as the light meter got here, I tested it out and was instantly able to get it right.

Jul 03, 2009 at 06:22 PM

johntodd
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · Light Meters Still Relevant

I'm always impressed and filled with respect at Mr. Gardner's willingness and patience in helping us newbies with these issues. That white towel must have been in more photos than the average supermodel! How long before he caves to pressure and starts selling the CG-branded 'ExpoTowel' and the inevitable 'ExpoTowel Pro'?

In all seriousness, thank you, Chuck.

Jul 03, 2009 at 06:53 PM

Carmen Miranda
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · Light Meters Still Relevant

johntodd wrote: That white towel must have been in more photos than the average supermodel!

Wasn't "The White Towel" recently voted as everyone's favorite model on this Forum not too long ago?

I'm actually expecting it to show up one day as a subject in either the Weekly or Monthly Assignment Forums.

Jul 03, 2009 at 07:19 PM

Cableaddict
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Can anyone recommend a good tutorial (book or video) that covers using a meter, in detail & from "the ground up" ? I have several lighting tutorials that mention meters along the way, but they always leave some important aspect out, as if the reader was already familiar with the basics.

I'm not afraid of a little math, but guide numbers & such make my brain fog over.

Also: I sort-of understand some of the advanced features modern meters have, (averaging readings, etc) but for the basic purpose of balancing 3 lights, can one "get by" with a 20 year old analog meter? (plus a towel

)

thanks.

Jul 03, 2009 at 08:29 PM

Garry Burton
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Light Meters Still Relevant

)

thanks.

Chuck + the towel explains it pretty well, the rest is pratice and using your eye and critiquing the results.

I went to Tech' when I was a puppy and worked in a studio. Light ratios are real simple and one usually picks it up in an hour or so. The rest is positioning the lights.

Me: I always start with my BG light then bring in the main, then fill and any other lights I may add.

The trick is to meter/see whateach light does seperately and see it's effect.

Yes, your analogue meter and towle will work fine with hot lights but you're out of luck with flash (unless it has a flash mode of course) it's just that they arn't very acurate and require a lot of light to function correctly. You'll need your cloths basket to assist you.

This is may help you a bit http://photoworkshop.com/static/lightcage/index.html

Cheers Gaz

Jul 03, 2009 at 09:27 PM

Carmen Miranda
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Cable,

It is really surprising how many different ways people use a meter. Everybody seems to have a different method that works for them. I see my meter as Spock was to Kirk, a reliable, consistent, unemotional source of information that I can use as a reference before taking other intangibles into the equation. Bottom line whatever the meter tells you, you still have to make the call. More information is only good if you know what to do with it. I think watching others use a light meter is actually a better way to learn how to use one than to read about it. Fortunately today there is no lack of videos available. I'm sure YouTube will have plenty.

Will Crocket has done a couple of DVD's on this. Check out www.shootsmarter.com. He goes fairly deep, but can be controversial, which comes from having strong opinions like our resident meter guru, Chuck Gardner. Be sure to check out his toots.

You might also google Chris Grey. I love the way he keeps equipment techniques simple and real.

Wherever you go, don't let metering confuse you. It's always good to know different methods but many folks can't seem to resist getting a little heavy handed with the secret sauce, if you know what I mean. The most important thing is to have a strategy and use it consistently.

Ultimately, there is no substitute for experience, generally the more you actually use a meter the quicker it becomes an extension of your workflow and a more effective tool to unlock creativity as opposed to restricting it.

Good luck.

BTW, if you are not afraid of a little math then commit yourself to understanding the Inverse Square Law which profoundly affects everything in lighting. When the ISL bulb finally goes on, things like wrap, fall off, perspective, coverage, DOF and a host of other issues will all start to make sense organically and light control becomes oh so much easier. ISL is the Holy Grail of light. Wrap your hands around it and be blessed.

Edited on Jul 03, 2009 at 10:07 PM · View previous versions

Jul 03, 2009 at 09:53 PM

bka20d
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · Light Meters Still Relevant

)

thanks.

a good place to start might be the meter makers sites:
http://www.sekonic.co.jp/e_meter_tips
also look at the q&a

http://www.gossen-photo.de/english/text_faq_foto_methoden.html
there is pdf which you can download...
if you google the phrase "how to use a light meter" you should find video and written material which should be of value.
regards

Jul 03, 2009 at 09:58 PM

cgardner
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Cableaddict wrote:
Can anyone recommend a good tutorial (book or video) that covers using a meter, in detail & from "the ground up" ? I have several lighting tutorials that mention meters along the way, but they always leave some important aspect out, as if the reader was already familiar with the basics.

I have a tutorial called Lighting Ratios and Incident Metering Demystified which covers the basic concepts.

Portrait ratio math is based on the convention of the key light overlapping the fill source with the assumption the fill is placed near / above the camera and lighting both sides of the face evenly with one unit of light. A ratio of 2:1 describes a situation where from the point of view of the camera twice as much light is reflected from the highlights on the face vs the shadows. The simplest way I've found to illustrate the math of ratios is this way:

H:S
1:1 1 unit of fill hits highlight and shadow areas
1:0 Adding 1 unit of key light doubles the amount of light reflecting where it overlaps fill
===
2:1 The key lit areas reflect 2x more light than the fill.

What is a bit counter-intuitive is the fact to get a 2:1 reflected ratio the lights would need to be incident metered for equal power (same f/stop reading) at the face. You just need to keep in mind that reflected light is the sum of all the sources that hit that spot.
Using the same math, a 3:1 ratio is built by making the key light 2x stronger (+ 1 stop) incident than the fill:

H:S
1:1 1 unit of fill hits highlight and shadow areas
2:0 Adding 2 units of key light triples the amount of light reflecting where it overlaps fill
===
3:1 The key lit areas reflect 3x more light than the fill.

A 3:1 ratio has highlights which are the same as 2:1 with slightly darker shadows. As the ratios increase the highlights stay the same and the shadows get darker. As the shadows get darker the contrast makes the highlights attract more attention to what is there. Ideally you want to put the things you want the viewer to see -- eyes and mouth - in the highlighted areas and put the other parts in the shadows. That simply requires turning the face of the subject towards (not away) from the key light until it illuminates just the front of the face (i.e. short lighting).

The ratio numbers by themselves are meaningless until you put them into the context of the emotional reactions they evoke in the mind of the viewer. What you'll come to realize is that for all ratios the highlights are exposed the same and its actually how light or dark the shadows are which is the primary perceptual clue the brain keys off of when it thinks light is "hard" or "soft".

Take the same face in the same pose and simply change the lighting ratio to make the shadows progressively darker and most viewers will equate the darker shadowed ones with a harder edged, more rugged look.

A 2:1 ratio has light open shadows creates a "soft" look which fits the context for portraits of women intended to look feminine, babies and young kids you want to make look young. It also works well on almost any shot on a white background where shadows which are too dark become distractions.

A 3:1 ratio is considered a "normal" baseline for general photography because its similar to how we perceive ambient light in most situations. It fits the context for candid shooting, portraits of men and boys you want to look more mature than the 2:1 or women you want to portray as more serious and business-like as in an office setting or head shot for a business card.

At 4:1 and above the detail in the shadows begins to become hidden and on a dark background the contrast of the brighter key lit parts of the face will attract more and more attention as the facial shadows get darker. That's a double-edge sword because depending on the facial angle lighting pattern a heavier ratio can make the face appear asymmetrical and less flattering. So in general the darker ratios work better for things like profile views where you want to hide the detail on the side of the face towards the camera, character studies where you want to evoke a hard edged, or "wisdom of years", or mysterious emotional reaction in the mind of the viewer.

There are no rules in all of the above, just cause and effect. When you look at photos with different ratios try to consciously think about your initial instinctive reaction to how hard of soft the lighting looked and given the context of the content what emotional reaction it evoked. When you begin to consciously understand how you react sub-consciously to visual clues from the lighting you see, then you'll better understand how to evoke similar emotions when you conceptualize the goals for your shots.

Instead of approaching a portrait from the "Its a man so I need a 3:1 ratio" perspective, instead formulate a goal for the lighting based on the age and gender of the subject, the context of what they are doing in the photo and most importantly the emotional reaction you want to evoke in the mind the person who sees the person in the photo for the first time. When you are in-touch with how you react to lighting ratios in the photos, movies, TV and real life situations around you then you'll know instinctively when look created with the modeling lights looks right and will not even think in terms of what numerical ratio the lighting is.

Where the metering and numerical stuff is more valuable is after you create the look you want visually by trial and error. By metering the set-up after the fact to find out what the numerical ratios of the various lights were you can created a blueprint for the lighting you can refer to next time you want the same look and emotional vibe. Working from the blueprint will eliminate the trial and error. When a beginner follows the suggestions for setting a 3:1 ratio in a lighting text or diagram for the first time its like building a house you've never seen from a set of plans handed you by someone who has built one. You won't be able to visualize what the heck a 3:1 ratio is supposed to look like until you build one "by the numbers" and see the results and the emotional reaction it evokes in the photo.

Chuck

Jul 04, 2009 at 12:13 AM

jayk
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Yes

Jul 04, 2009 at 03:52 PM

Micky Bill
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · Light Meters Still Relevant

I have 4 meters and use them rarely. If you use the same lights and know what kind of power they put out then with experience you will be able to get very repeatable results. When I had a studio We used to set up a lighting scenario and then we'd bet on the exposure, loser bought coffee or lunch depending on the time of day. We could get pretty close.
Meters are good for getting in the ballpark as it will tell the 'correct' exposure but not always the 'best' exposure. In the olden days nobody would go directly to shooting film from a meter reading. We'd do a reading (or bet on exposure) shoot a polaroid and then adjust form there. Today instead of a polaroid I shoot a frame, check the lcd and the histogram and adjust from there.
To complicate things more, I'd run clip or snip tests from each set up and then adjust processing, because the final proof is in the film, not the meter reading.

Edited on Jul 08, 2009 at 04:28 PM · View previous versions

Jul 04, 2009 at 09:43 PM

frankie
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #21 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Absolutely, Its would be mad not to as you can tell by the replys you have had.....
L358D.

Jul 08, 2009 at 03:18 PM

RobertLynn
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #22 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Carmen Miranda wrote:
Cable,

BTW, if you are not afraid of a little math then commit yourself to understanding the Inverse Square Law which profoundly affects everything in lighting. When the ISL bulb finally goes on, things like wrap, fall off, perspective, coverage, DOF and a host of other issues will all start to make sense organically and light control becomes oh so much easier. ISL is the Holy Grail of light. Wrap your hands around it and be blessed.

I know what the ISL is on paper, but in practice, I may as well put my head in the toilet.

Jul 08, 2009 at 03:30 PM

pr4photos
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #23 · Light Meters Still Relevant

I photograph artwork, using studio lights, and a lightmeter is essential in helping get the lighting even. Would be impossible without!

Jul 08, 2009 at 03:58 PM

roanjohnnyc
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #24 · Light Meters Still Relevant

For multiple light set-ups, a light meter is key. Even the cheapest one will save you lots of time and aggrevation.

Jul 08, 2009 at 04:23 PM

el_hoppy
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #25 · Light Meters Still Relevant

Carmen Miranda wrote:
johntodd wrote: That white towel must have been in more photos than the average supermodel!

Wasn't "The White Towel" recently voted as everyone's favorite model on this Forum not too long ago?

I'm actually expecting it to show up one day as a subject in either the Weekly or Monthly Assignment Forums.

Maybe FMer's can do with Chucks white towel what they do on pbase with Frimpong the bear

http://www.pbase.com/frimpong

Jul 08, 2009 at 04:26 PM


FM Forums \| Lighting & Studio Techniques \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end