Can external light meter replace the need for push/pull?Is there a formula to calculate ISO according to...
What word best describes someone who likes to do everything on his own?
How many years before enough atoms of your body are replaced to survive the sudden disappearance of the original body’s atoms?
12V lead acid charger with LM317 not charging
Why should public servants be apolitical?
Does this put me at risk for identity theft?
Is the Folding Boat truly seaworthy?
Is it a bad idea to offer variants of a final exam based on the type of allowed calculators?
Traveling from Germany to other countries by train?
Where in ש״ס who one find the adage, “He who suggests the idea should carry it out”?
"In charge of" vs "Responsible for"
Was Richard I's imprisonment by Leopold of Austria justified?
Where to pee in London?
What is the bio-mechanical plausibility of a fox with venomous fangs?
Differentiability of operator norm
How to continue a line in Latex in math mode?
Can I enter a rental property without giving notice if I'm afraid a tenant may be hurt?
Can a Hogwarts student refuse the Sorting Hat's decision?
Getting ExecuteError: ERROR 001558: Error parsing JSON file in ArcPy?
Why do private jets such as Gulfstream fly higher than other civilian jets?
The actual purview of Her Majesty The Queen's Perogative?
Secure my password from unsafe servers
Does a 4 bladed prop have almost twice the thrust of a 2 bladed prop?
Do any languages mention the top limit of a range first?
Why should I "believe in" weak solutions to PDEs?
Can external light meter replace the need for push/pull?
Is there a formula to calculate ISO according to Shutter speed?Do I need a $600 light meter or will a $250 one do?Why would you have a light meter chose your aperture for you?Metering without a incident light meterWhy is distance absent from the exposure triangle?Am I wrong to judge my exposure using my smartphone?Does crop factor affect light meter readings?How can I use a non-TTL lightmeter beyond its built-in ISO range?Why does push processing seem to be so popular?How to meter when pushing film?Does DSLR (no metering/live preview) + Light Meter recreate the same level of difficulty as working with film?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
External light meter allows you to set the ISO speed at your liking.
Does that mean you can replace that for the need of pushing or pulling your film?
film light-meter push-processing
asked 15 hours ago
neversaintneversaint
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
add a comment |
External light meter allows you to set the ISO speed at your liking.
Does that mean you can replace that for the need of pushing or pulling your film?
film light-meter push-processing
asked 15 hours ago
neversaintneversaint
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
3
You've asked a number of questions now on pushing and pulling film, and I wonder if you understand the ISO rating of a film. "Digital natives" treat ISO as just another variable parameter when setting exposure, but it does not work like that with film! You should respect the ISO of your film. Load film, and treat the ISO as fixed at box speed. Use aperture and shutter speed to control exposure. Forget about pushing/pulling film for now - you are setting yourself up for disappointing results. That's my opinion.
– osullic
11 hours ago
1
If you are photographing in conditions that are too dark (or too bright) for your film, well, that's a lesson of film photography. You either need to use a tripod for longer exposures, come back at a time when light levels are higher, or use a different film! You can't just "bump up the ISO" as you can with digital.
– osullic
11 hours ago
add a comment |
External light meter allows you to set the ISO speed at your liking.
Does that mean you can replace that for the need of pushing or pulling your film?
film light-meter push-processing
asked 15 hours ago
neversaintneversaint
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
External light meter allows you to set the ISO speed at your liking.
Does that mean you can replace that for the need of pushing or pulling your film?
film light-meter push-processing
film light-meter push-processing
asked 15 hours ago
neversaintneversaint
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
asked 15 hours ago
neversaintneversaint
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
asked 15 hours ago
neversaintneversaint
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
asked 15 hours ago
neversaintneversaint
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
asked 15 hours ago
neversaintneversaint
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
6823 silver badges14 bronze badges
3
You've asked a number of questions now on pushing and pulling film, and I wonder if you understand the ISO rating of a film. "Digital natives" treat ISO as just another variable parameter when setting exposure, but it does not work like that with film! You should respect the ISO of your film. Load film, and treat the ISO as fixed at box speed. Use aperture and shutter speed to control exposure. Forget about pushing/pulling film for now - you are setting yourself up for disappointing results. That's my opinion.
– osullic
11 hours ago
1
If you are photographing in conditions that are too dark (or too bright) for your film, well, that's a lesson of film photography. You either need to use a tripod for longer exposures, come back at a time when light levels are higher, or use a different film! You can't just "bump up the ISO" as you can with digital.
– osullic
11 hours ago
add a comment |
3
You've asked a number of questions now on pushing and pulling film, and I wonder if you understand the ISO rating of a film. "Digital natives" treat ISO as just another variable parameter when setting exposure, but it does not work like that with film! You should respect the ISO of your film. Load film, and treat the ISO as fixed at box speed. Use aperture and shutter speed to control exposure. Forget about pushing/pulling film for now - you are setting yourself up for disappointing results. That's my opinion.
– osullic
11 hours ago
1
If you are photographing in conditions that are too dark (or too bright) for your film, well, that's a lesson of film photography. You either need to use a tripod for longer exposures, come back at a time when light levels are higher, or use a different film! You can't just "bump up the ISO" as you can with digital.
– osullic
11 hours ago
3
3
You've asked a number of questions now on pushing and pulling film, and I wonder if you understand the ISO rating of a film. "Digital natives" treat ISO as just another variable parameter when setting exposure, but it does not work like that with film! You should respect the ISO of your film. Load film, and treat the ISO as fixed at box speed. Use aperture and shutter speed to control exposure. Forget about pushing/pulling film for now - you are setting yourself up for disappointing results. That's my opinion.
– osullic
11 hours ago
You've asked a number of questions now on pushing and pulling film, and I wonder if you understand the ISO rating of a film. "Digital natives" treat ISO as just another variable parameter when setting exposure, but it does not work like that with film! You should respect the ISO of your film. Load film, and treat the ISO as fixed at box speed. Use aperture and shutter speed to control exposure. Forget about pushing/pulling film for now - you are setting yourself up for disappointing results. That's my opinion.
– osullic
11 hours ago
1
1
If you are photographing in conditions that are too dark (or too bright) for your film, well, that's a lesson of film photography. You either need to use a tripod for longer exposures, come back at a time when light levels are higher, or use a different film! You can't just "bump up the ISO" as you can with digital.
– osullic
11 hours ago
If you are photographing in conditions that are too dark (or too bright) for your film, well, that's a lesson of film photography. You either need to use a tripod for longer exposures, come back at a time when light levels are higher, or use a different film! You can't just "bump up the ISO" as you can with digital.
– osullic
11 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
No, it does not.
A given film has a given sensitivity, expressed as ISO. What this means is that, if processed normally, then there's a relationship between the amount of light which falls on a given area of the film and the density of that area after it is processed. This relationship is generally monotonic (more light means darker) but not linear or proportional: in particular it is somewhat 'S' shaped, so that the relationship between light and density flattens off both at the top of the curve and the bottom. So, for instance, however much light you expose the film to it will only go so dark after development.
If more light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is overexposed) & you process it normally the resulting negatives will be very dense, and detail will be lost in the highlights as a lot of the information will be squashed up into the top (shoulder) of the 'S'. To deal with this you pull the film in development which makes the negatives less dense & preserves some detail in the highlights, at the cost of negative quality.
If less light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is underexposed), then if it is processed normally the resulting negatives will be very thin and detail will be lost in the shadows as information is squashed into the bottom (toe) of the 'S'. To deal with this you push the film in development which makes the negs denser, recovers some detail in the shadows, again at the cost of negative quality.
A meter gives you some information about the light conditions, and setting the ISO on the meter will let it tell you what exposure is appropriate for a film of that ISO. It will not change the ISO of the film. If you set the meter, say, to have an ISO a stop more than your film, then your film will be underexposed by a stop. If you set the meter to have an ISO of 1 and use Tri-X, it will be overexposed by about 8 stops.
[Disclaimer: yes, I've oversimplified the film-sensitivity thing somewhat.]
answered 14 hours ago
tfbtfb
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
This is a fine answer. You mention "at the cost of the negative quality" which is misleading though. The value of the negative is to produce a print with a desirable density (tonal) range. The quality of the negative is not an issue aside from its functionality. A better answer would not make this statement.
– Stan
9 hours ago
Monotonic does not explain solarization.
– Stan
9 hours ago
The redox relationship of a silver colloidal suspension to radiation is proportional but not linear. It is not monotonic as excessive exposure will reverse the curve producing less density upon chemical reduction. Kindly accept the correct edit.
– Stan
8 hours ago
@Stan: y is proportional to x iff y = ax for some constant a. Proportional is a stricter version of linear: y is a linear function of y if y = ax + b for constants a and b. If all you can say is that y = f(x) and if x2 > x1 then y(x2) >= y(x1) then y is a monotonic function (strictly a monotonic increasing function) of x. This is also the common usage in English: if you scale an image proportionately you keep the ratio between its width and height constant: they vary proportionately with each other. And yes, Solarization: I said in the answer I'd simplified the film-sensitivity thing
– tfb
6 hours ago
@Stan: and as regards negative quality, heavily underexposed & overdeveloped negs are, as you know, grainy as shit. I regard that as being a poor-quality neg, and I think that's a common view.
– tfb
6 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
If you use an external light meter, you should set its ISO setting to match the film in your camera. You use the meter to measure the light, and it tells you what aperture and shutter speed to set on your camera. It's as simple as that.
You cannot just set any ISO value on the meter. Because that's not the sensitivity of the film in your camera. If you set the incorrect ISO value on the meter, it will (understandably) give you incorrect suggestions for aperture / shutter speed, and you will expose your film incorrectly.
answered 11 hours ago
osullicosullic
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
add a comment |
We use the light meter to gauge scene brightness. We set our camera's exposure based on the light meter reading augmented by experience. Our goal might be reduced contrast -- we pull. Our goal might be increased contrast -- we push. One axiom - expose for the shadows and then develop for the highlights -- it still stands! However I like this modification -- Underexpose to allow over-developing -- overexpose to allow under-developing.
answered 11 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
And it is important to remember that that is all "pushing" is: underexposure. As you say, compensate by over-development...and a result is increased contrast. But it's important to remember that pushing is not some magical way to change the sensitivity of the film.
– osullic
10 hours ago
add a comment |
A light meter is a device to indicate the amount of electricity produced by a photocell according to the level of luminance. It correlates light intensity to a numerical index.
The resulting numerical index (reading) is then used with a calculator (mechanical or algorithmic) to indicate a combination of intensity and time settings for an exposure by an electro-mechanical apparatus according to the ISO formula.
Mathematically, you can calculate it all via:
- sISO = ln(ISO / 100) / ln(2)
- sAperture = -ln(Aperture) / ln(√2)
- sShutter = EV + sISO + sAperture
- Shutter speed = 2-sShutter
Taken from Is there a formula to calculate ISO…
Setting the ISO index on a calculator is not altering the speed/sensitivity of the actual material you are using. You could put ISO 100 film in your camera and set it to 1000 on your calculator which doesn't change what is in your camera.
Using the incorrect setting will produce disappointing results.
You must compensate (somehow) for the difference between the actual sensitivity and the wanted results. With film, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with chemical energy, by increased (push) processing. With a sensor, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with amplification of the signal. The same is true for excessive photonic energy. You must compensate for the deviation in exposure level from desirable.
answered 7 hours ago
StanStan
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
Note that natural logs (ln) are used (base 2) to preserve the ½X, 2X relationships that we relate to whole "stops."
– Stan
7 hours ago
2
to understand you correctly. Let's say box ISO is 400, as long as I compensate in development, the setting ISO to 800 in external light meter is equivalent to setting ISO 800 camera. Right?
– neversaint
4 hours ago
2
@neversaint Equivalent? No. Close maybe. The result will always be a concession, more or less. I used 'compensate' to suggest your results may vary.
– Stan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "61"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f110174%2fcan-external-light-meter-replace-the-need-for-push-pull%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
No, it does not.
A given film has a given sensitivity, expressed as ISO. What this means is that, if processed normally, then there's a relationship between the amount of light which falls on a given area of the film and the density of that area after it is processed. This relationship is generally monotonic (more light means darker) but not linear or proportional: in particular it is somewhat 'S' shaped, so that the relationship between light and density flattens off both at the top of the curve and the bottom. So, for instance, however much light you expose the film to it will only go so dark after development.
If more light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is overexposed) & you process it normally the resulting negatives will be very dense, and detail will be lost in the highlights as a lot of the information will be squashed up into the top (shoulder) of the 'S'. To deal with this you pull the film in development which makes the negatives less dense & preserves some detail in the highlights, at the cost of negative quality.
If less light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is underexposed), then if it is processed normally the resulting negatives will be very thin and detail will be lost in the shadows as information is squashed into the bottom (toe) of the 'S'. To deal with this you push the film in development which makes the negs denser, recovers some detail in the shadows, again at the cost of negative quality.
A meter gives you some information about the light conditions, and setting the ISO on the meter will let it tell you what exposure is appropriate for a film of that ISO. It will not change the ISO of the film. If you set the meter, say, to have an ISO a stop more than your film, then your film will be underexposed by a stop. If you set the meter to have an ISO of 1 and use Tri-X, it will be overexposed by about 8 stops.
[Disclaimer: yes, I've oversimplified the film-sensitivity thing somewhat.]
answered 14 hours ago
tfbtfb
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
This is a fine answer. You mention "at the cost of the negative quality" which is misleading though. The value of the negative is to produce a print with a desirable density (tonal) range. The quality of the negative is not an issue aside from its functionality. A better answer would not make this statement.
– Stan
9 hours ago
Monotonic does not explain solarization.
– Stan
9 hours ago
The redox relationship of a silver colloidal suspension to radiation is proportional but not linear. It is not monotonic as excessive exposure will reverse the curve producing less density upon chemical reduction. Kindly accept the correct edit.
– Stan
8 hours ago
@Stan: y is proportional to x iff y = ax for some constant a. Proportional is a stricter version of linear: y is a linear function of y if y = ax + b for constants a and b. If all you can say is that y = f(x) and if x2 > x1 then y(x2) >= y(x1) then y is a monotonic function (strictly a monotonic increasing function) of x. This is also the common usage in English: if you scale an image proportionately you keep the ratio between its width and height constant: they vary proportionately with each other. And yes, Solarization: I said in the answer I'd simplified the film-sensitivity thing
– tfb
6 hours ago
@Stan: and as regards negative quality, heavily underexposed & overdeveloped negs are, as you know, grainy as shit. I regard that as being a poor-quality neg, and I think that's a common view.
– tfb
6 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
No, it does not.
A given film has a given sensitivity, expressed as ISO. What this means is that, if processed normally, then there's a relationship between the amount of light which falls on a given area of the film and the density of that area after it is processed. This relationship is generally monotonic (more light means darker) but not linear or proportional: in particular it is somewhat 'S' shaped, so that the relationship between light and density flattens off both at the top of the curve and the bottom. So, for instance, however much light you expose the film to it will only go so dark after development.
If more light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is overexposed) & you process it normally the resulting negatives will be very dense, and detail will be lost in the highlights as a lot of the information will be squashed up into the top (shoulder) of the 'S'. To deal with this you pull the film in development which makes the negatives less dense & preserves some detail in the highlights, at the cost of negative quality.
If less light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is underexposed), then if it is processed normally the resulting negatives will be very thin and detail will be lost in the shadows as information is squashed into the bottom (toe) of the 'S'. To deal with this you push the film in development which makes the negs denser, recovers some detail in the shadows, again at the cost of negative quality.
A meter gives you some information about the light conditions, and setting the ISO on the meter will let it tell you what exposure is appropriate for a film of that ISO. It will not change the ISO of the film. If you set the meter, say, to have an ISO a stop more than your film, then your film will be underexposed by a stop. If you set the meter to have an ISO of 1 and use Tri-X, it will be overexposed by about 8 stops.
[Disclaimer: yes, I've oversimplified the film-sensitivity thing somewhat.]
answered 14 hours ago
tfbtfb
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
This is a fine answer. You mention "at the cost of the negative quality" which is misleading though. The value of the negative is to produce a print with a desirable density (tonal) range. The quality of the negative is not an issue aside from its functionality. A better answer would not make this statement.
– Stan
9 hours ago
Monotonic does not explain solarization.
– Stan
9 hours ago
The redox relationship of a silver colloidal suspension to radiation is proportional but not linear. It is not monotonic as excessive exposure will reverse the curve producing less density upon chemical reduction. Kindly accept the correct edit.
– Stan
8 hours ago
@Stan: y is proportional to x iff y = ax for some constant a. Proportional is a stricter version of linear: y is a linear function of y if y = ax + b for constants a and b. If all you can say is that y = f(x) and if x2 > x1 then y(x2) >= y(x1) then y is a monotonic function (strictly a monotonic increasing function) of x. This is also the common usage in English: if you scale an image proportionately you keep the ratio between its width and height constant: they vary proportionately with each other. And yes, Solarization: I said in the answer I'd simplified the film-sensitivity thing
– tfb
6 hours ago
@Stan: and as regards negative quality, heavily underexposed & overdeveloped negs are, as you know, grainy as shit. I regard that as being a poor-quality neg, and I think that's a common view.
– tfb
6 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
No, it does not.
A given film has a given sensitivity, expressed as ISO. What this means is that, if processed normally, then there's a relationship between the amount of light which falls on a given area of the film and the density of that area after it is processed. This relationship is generally monotonic (more light means darker) but not linear or proportional: in particular it is somewhat 'S' shaped, so that the relationship between light and density flattens off both at the top of the curve and the bottom. So, for instance, however much light you expose the film to it will only go so dark after development.
If more light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is overexposed) & you process it normally the resulting negatives will be very dense, and detail will be lost in the highlights as a lot of the information will be squashed up into the top (shoulder) of the 'S'. To deal with this you pull the film in development which makes the negatives less dense & preserves some detail in the highlights, at the cost of negative quality.
If less light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is underexposed), then if it is processed normally the resulting negatives will be very thin and detail will be lost in the shadows as information is squashed into the bottom (toe) of the 'S'. To deal with this you push the film in development which makes the negs denser, recovers some detail in the shadows, again at the cost of negative quality.
A meter gives you some information about the light conditions, and setting the ISO on the meter will let it tell you what exposure is appropriate for a film of that ISO. It will not change the ISO of the film. If you set the meter, say, to have an ISO a stop more than your film, then your film will be underexposed by a stop. If you set the meter to have an ISO of 1 and use Tri-X, it will be overexposed by about 8 stops.
[Disclaimer: yes, I've oversimplified the film-sensitivity thing somewhat.]
answered 14 hours ago
tfbtfb
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
No, it does not.
A given film has a given sensitivity, expressed as ISO. What this means is that, if processed normally, then there's a relationship between the amount of light which falls on a given area of the film and the density of that area after it is processed. This relationship is generally monotonic (more light means darker) but not linear or proportional: in particular it is somewhat 'S' shaped, so that the relationship between light and density flattens off both at the top of the curve and the bottom. So, for instance, however much light you expose the film to it will only go so dark after development.
If more light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is overexposed) & you process it normally the resulting negatives will be very dense, and detail will be lost in the highlights as a lot of the information will be squashed up into the top (shoulder) of the 'S'. To deal with this you pull the film in development which makes the negatives less dense & preserves some detail in the highlights, at the cost of negative quality.
If less light falls on the film than it is intended for (it is underexposed), then if it is processed normally the resulting negatives will be very thin and detail will be lost in the shadows as information is squashed into the bottom (toe) of the 'S'. To deal with this you push the film in development which makes the negs denser, recovers some detail in the shadows, again at the cost of negative quality.
A meter gives you some information about the light conditions, and setting the ISO on the meter will let it tell you what exposure is appropriate for a film of that ISO. It will not change the ISO of the film. If you set the meter, say, to have an ISO a stop more than your film, then your film will be underexposed by a stop. If you set the meter to have an ISO of 1 and use Tri-X, it will be overexposed by about 8 stops.
[Disclaimer: yes, I've oversimplified the film-sensitivity thing somewhat.]
answered 14 hours ago
tfbtfb
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
edited 9 hours ago
answered 14 hours ago
tfbtfb
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
answered 14 hours ago
tfbtfb
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
answered 14 hours ago
tfbtfb
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
2,4843 silver badges14 bronze badges
This is a fine answer. You mention "at the cost of the negative quality" which is misleading though. The value of the negative is to produce a print with a desirable density (tonal) range. The quality of the negative is not an issue aside from its functionality. A better answer would not make this statement.
– Stan
9 hours ago
Monotonic does not explain solarization.
– Stan
9 hours ago
The redox relationship of a silver colloidal suspension to radiation is proportional but not linear. It is not monotonic as excessive exposure will reverse the curve producing less density upon chemical reduction. Kindly accept the correct edit.
– Stan
8 hours ago
@Stan: y is proportional to x iff y = ax for some constant a. Proportional is a stricter version of linear: y is a linear function of y if y = ax + b for constants a and b. If all you can say is that y = f(x) and if x2 > x1 then y(x2) >= y(x1) then y is a monotonic function (strictly a monotonic increasing function) of x. This is also the common usage in English: if you scale an image proportionately you keep the ratio between its width and height constant: they vary proportionately with each other. And yes, Solarization: I said in the answer I'd simplified the film-sensitivity thing
– tfb
6 hours ago
@Stan: and as regards negative quality, heavily underexposed & overdeveloped negs are, as you know, grainy as shit. I regard that as being a poor-quality neg, and I think that's a common view.
– tfb
6 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
This is a fine answer. You mention "at the cost of the negative quality" which is misleading though. The value of the negative is to produce a print with a desirable density (tonal) range. The quality of the negative is not an issue aside from its functionality. A better answer would not make this statement.
– Stan
9 hours ago
Monotonic does not explain solarization.
– Stan
9 hours ago
The redox relationship of a silver colloidal suspension to radiation is proportional but not linear. It is not monotonic as excessive exposure will reverse the curve producing less density upon chemical reduction. Kindly accept the correct edit.
– Stan
8 hours ago
@Stan: y is proportional to x iff y = ax for some constant a. Proportional is a stricter version of linear: y is a linear function of y if y = ax + b for constants a and b. If all you can say is that y = f(x) and if x2 > x1 then y(x2) >= y(x1) then y is a monotonic function (strictly a monotonic increasing function) of x. This is also the common usage in English: if you scale an image proportionately you keep the ratio between its width and height constant: they vary proportionately with each other. And yes, Solarization: I said in the answer I'd simplified the film-sensitivity thing
– tfb
6 hours ago
@Stan: and as regards negative quality, heavily underexposed & overdeveloped negs are, as you know, grainy as shit. I regard that as being a poor-quality neg, and I think that's a common view.
– tfb
6 hours ago
This is a fine answer. You mention "at the cost of the negative quality" which is misleading though. The value of the negative is to produce a print with a desirable density (tonal) range. The quality of the negative is not an issue aside from its functionality. A better answer would not make this statement.
– Stan
9 hours ago
This is a fine answer. You mention "at the cost of the negative quality" which is misleading though. The value of the negative is to produce a print with a desirable density (tonal) range. The quality of the negative is not an issue aside from its functionality. A better answer would not make this statement.
– Stan
9 hours ago
Monotonic does not explain solarization.
– Stan
9 hours ago
Monotonic does not explain solarization.
– Stan
9 hours ago
The redox relationship of a silver colloidal suspension to radiation is proportional but not linear. It is not monotonic as excessive exposure will reverse the curve producing less density upon chemical reduction. Kindly accept the correct edit.
– Stan
8 hours ago
The redox relationship of a silver colloidal suspension to radiation is proportional but not linear. It is not monotonic as excessive exposure will reverse the curve producing less density upon chemical reduction. Kindly accept the correct edit.
– Stan
8 hours ago
@Stan: y is proportional to x iff y = ax for some constant a. Proportional is a stricter version of linear: y is a linear function of y if y = ax + b for constants a and b. If all you can say is that y = f(x) and if x2 > x1 then y(x2) >= y(x1) then y is a monotonic function (strictly a monotonic increasing function) of x. This is also the common usage in English: if you scale an image proportionately you keep the ratio between its width and height constant: they vary proportionately with each other. And yes, Solarization: I said in the answer I'd simplified the film-sensitivity thing
– tfb
6 hours ago
@Stan: y is proportional to x iff y = ax for some constant a. Proportional is a stricter version of linear: y is a linear function of y if y = ax + b for constants a and b. If all you can say is that y = f(x) and if x2 > x1 then y(x2) >= y(x1) then y is a monotonic function (strictly a monotonic increasing function) of x. This is also the common usage in English: if you scale an image proportionately you keep the ratio between its width and height constant: they vary proportionately with each other. And yes, Solarization: I said in the answer I'd simplified the film-sensitivity thing
– tfb
6 hours ago
@Stan: and as regards negative quality, heavily underexposed & overdeveloped negs are, as you know, grainy as shit. I regard that as being a poor-quality neg, and I think that's a common view.
– tfb
6 hours ago
@Stan: and as regards negative quality, heavily underexposed & overdeveloped negs are, as you know, grainy as shit. I regard that as being a poor-quality neg, and I think that's a common view.
– tfb
6 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
If you use an external light meter, you should set its ISO setting to match the film in your camera. You use the meter to measure the light, and it tells you what aperture and shutter speed to set on your camera. It's as simple as that.
You cannot just set any ISO value on the meter. Because that's not the sensitivity of the film in your camera. If you set the incorrect ISO value on the meter, it will (understandably) give you incorrect suggestions for aperture / shutter speed, and you will expose your film incorrectly.
answered 11 hours ago
osullicosullic
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
add a comment |
If you use an external light meter, you should set its ISO setting to match the film in your camera. You use the meter to measure the light, and it tells you what aperture and shutter speed to set on your camera. It's as simple as that.
You cannot just set any ISO value on the meter. Because that's not the sensitivity of the film in your camera. If you set the incorrect ISO value on the meter, it will (understandably) give you incorrect suggestions for aperture / shutter speed, and you will expose your film incorrectly.
answered 11 hours ago
osullicosullic
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
add a comment |
If you use an external light meter, you should set its ISO setting to match the film in your camera. You use the meter to measure the light, and it tells you what aperture and shutter speed to set on your camera. It's as simple as that.
You cannot just set any ISO value on the meter. Because that's not the sensitivity of the film in your camera. If you set the incorrect ISO value on the meter, it will (understandably) give you incorrect suggestions for aperture / shutter speed, and you will expose your film incorrectly.
answered 11 hours ago
osullicosullic
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
If you use an external light meter, you should set its ISO setting to match the film in your camera. You use the meter to measure the light, and it tells you what aperture and shutter speed to set on your camera. It's as simple as that.
You cannot just set any ISO value on the meter. Because that's not the sensitivity of the film in your camera. If you set the incorrect ISO value on the meter, it will (understandably) give you incorrect suggestions for aperture / shutter speed, and you will expose your film incorrectly.
answered 11 hours ago
osullicosullic
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
edited 10 hours ago
answered 11 hours ago
osullicosullic
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
answered 11 hours ago
osullicosullic
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
answered 11 hours ago
osullicosullic
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
6,4241 gold badge14 silver badges28 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
We use the light meter to gauge scene brightness. We set our camera's exposure based on the light meter reading augmented by experience. Our goal might be reduced contrast -- we pull. Our goal might be increased contrast -- we push. One axiom - expose for the shadows and then develop for the highlights -- it still stands! However I like this modification -- Underexpose to allow over-developing -- overexpose to allow under-developing.
answered 11 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
And it is important to remember that that is all "pushing" is: underexposure. As you say, compensate by over-development...and a result is increased contrast. But it's important to remember that pushing is not some magical way to change the sensitivity of the film.
– osullic
10 hours ago
add a comment |
We use the light meter to gauge scene brightness. We set our camera's exposure based on the light meter reading augmented by experience. Our goal might be reduced contrast -- we pull. Our goal might be increased contrast -- we push. One axiom - expose for the shadows and then develop for the highlights -- it still stands! However I like this modification -- Underexpose to allow over-developing -- overexpose to allow under-developing.
answered 11 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
And it is important to remember that that is all "pushing" is: underexposure. As you say, compensate by over-development...and a result is increased contrast. But it's important to remember that pushing is not some magical way to change the sensitivity of the film.
– osullic
10 hours ago
add a comment |
We use the light meter to gauge scene brightness. We set our camera's exposure based on the light meter reading augmented by experience. Our goal might be reduced contrast -- we pull. Our goal might be increased contrast -- we push. One axiom - expose for the shadows and then develop for the highlights -- it still stands! However I like this modification -- Underexpose to allow over-developing -- overexpose to allow under-developing.
answered 11 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
We use the light meter to gauge scene brightness. We set our camera's exposure based on the light meter reading augmented by experience. Our goal might be reduced contrast -- we pull. Our goal might be increased contrast -- we push. One axiom - expose for the shadows and then develop for the highlights -- it still stands! However I like this modification -- Underexpose to allow over-developing -- overexpose to allow under-developing.
answered 11 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
answered 11 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
answered 11 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
answered 11 hours ago
Alan MarcusAlan Marcus
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
28k3 gold badges31 silver badges65 bronze badges
And it is important to remember that that is all "pushing" is: underexposure. As you say, compensate by over-development...and a result is increased contrast. But it's important to remember that pushing is not some magical way to change the sensitivity of the film.
– osullic
10 hours ago
add a comment |
And it is important to remember that that is all "pushing" is: underexposure. As you say, compensate by over-development...and a result is increased contrast. But it's important to remember that pushing is not some magical way to change the sensitivity of the film.
– osullic
10 hours ago
And it is important to remember that that is all "pushing" is: underexposure. As you say, compensate by over-development...and a result is increased contrast. But it's important to remember that pushing is not some magical way to change the sensitivity of the film.
– osullic
10 hours ago
And it is important to remember that that is all "pushing" is: underexposure. As you say, compensate by over-development...and a result is increased contrast. But it's important to remember that pushing is not some magical way to change the sensitivity of the film.
– osullic
10 hours ago
add a comment |
A light meter is a device to indicate the amount of electricity produced by a photocell according to the level of luminance. It correlates light intensity to a numerical index.
The resulting numerical index (reading) is then used with a calculator (mechanical or algorithmic) to indicate a combination of intensity and time settings for an exposure by an electro-mechanical apparatus according to the ISO formula.
Mathematically, you can calculate it all via:
- sISO = ln(ISO / 100) / ln(2)
- sAperture = -ln(Aperture) / ln(√2)
- sShutter = EV + sISO + sAperture
- Shutter speed = 2-sShutter
Taken from Is there a formula to calculate ISO…
Setting the ISO index on a calculator is not altering the speed/sensitivity of the actual material you are using. You could put ISO 100 film in your camera and set it to 1000 on your calculator which doesn't change what is in your camera.
Using the incorrect setting will produce disappointing results.
You must compensate (somehow) for the difference between the actual sensitivity and the wanted results. With film, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with chemical energy, by increased (push) processing. With a sensor, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with amplification of the signal. The same is true for excessive photonic energy. You must compensate for the deviation in exposure level from desirable.
answered 7 hours ago
StanStan
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
Note that natural logs (ln) are used (base 2) to preserve the ½X, 2X relationships that we relate to whole "stops."
– Stan
7 hours ago
2
to understand you correctly. Let's say box ISO is 400, as long as I compensate in development, the setting ISO to 800 in external light meter is equivalent to setting ISO 800 camera. Right?
– neversaint
4 hours ago
2
@neversaint Equivalent? No. Close maybe. The result will always be a concession, more or less. I used 'compensate' to suggest your results may vary.
– Stan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
A light meter is a device to indicate the amount of electricity produced by a photocell according to the level of luminance. It correlates light intensity to a numerical index.
The resulting numerical index (reading) is then used with a calculator (mechanical or algorithmic) to indicate a combination of intensity and time settings for an exposure by an electro-mechanical apparatus according to the ISO formula.
Mathematically, you can calculate it all via:
- sISO = ln(ISO / 100) / ln(2)
- sAperture = -ln(Aperture) / ln(√2)
- sShutter = EV + sISO + sAperture
- Shutter speed = 2-sShutter
Taken from Is there a formula to calculate ISO…
Setting the ISO index on a calculator is not altering the speed/sensitivity of the actual material you are using. You could put ISO 100 film in your camera and set it to 1000 on your calculator which doesn't change what is in your camera.
Using the incorrect setting will produce disappointing results.
You must compensate (somehow) for the difference between the actual sensitivity and the wanted results. With film, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with chemical energy, by increased (push) processing. With a sensor, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with amplification of the signal. The same is true for excessive photonic energy. You must compensate for the deviation in exposure level from desirable.
answered 7 hours ago
StanStan
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
Note that natural logs (ln) are used (base 2) to preserve the ½X, 2X relationships that we relate to whole "stops."
– Stan
7 hours ago
2
to understand you correctly. Let's say box ISO is 400, as long as I compensate in development, the setting ISO to 800 in external light meter is equivalent to setting ISO 800 camera. Right?
– neversaint
4 hours ago
2
@neversaint Equivalent? No. Close maybe. The result will always be a concession, more or less. I used 'compensate' to suggest your results may vary.
– Stan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
A light meter is a device to indicate the amount of electricity produced by a photocell according to the level of luminance. It correlates light intensity to a numerical index.
The resulting numerical index (reading) is then used with a calculator (mechanical or algorithmic) to indicate a combination of intensity and time settings for an exposure by an electro-mechanical apparatus according to the ISO formula.
Mathematically, you can calculate it all via:
- sISO = ln(ISO / 100) / ln(2)
- sAperture = -ln(Aperture) / ln(√2)
- sShutter = EV + sISO + sAperture
- Shutter speed = 2-sShutter
Taken from Is there a formula to calculate ISO…
Setting the ISO index on a calculator is not altering the speed/sensitivity of the actual material you are using. You could put ISO 100 film in your camera and set it to 1000 on your calculator which doesn't change what is in your camera.
Using the incorrect setting will produce disappointing results.
You must compensate (somehow) for the difference between the actual sensitivity and the wanted results. With film, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with chemical energy, by increased (push) processing. With a sensor, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with amplification of the signal. The same is true for excessive photonic energy. You must compensate for the deviation in exposure level from desirable.
answered 7 hours ago
StanStan
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
A light meter is a device to indicate the amount of electricity produced by a photocell according to the level of luminance. It correlates light intensity to a numerical index.
The resulting numerical index (reading) is then used with a calculator (mechanical or algorithmic) to indicate a combination of intensity and time settings for an exposure by an electro-mechanical apparatus according to the ISO formula.
Mathematically, you can calculate it all via:
- sISO = ln(ISO / 100) / ln(2)
- sAperture = -ln(Aperture) / ln(√2)
- sShutter = EV + sISO + sAperture
- Shutter speed = 2-sShutter
Taken from Is there a formula to calculate ISO…
Setting the ISO index on a calculator is not altering the speed/sensitivity of the actual material you are using. You could put ISO 100 film in your camera and set it to 1000 on your calculator which doesn't change what is in your camera.
Using the incorrect setting will produce disappointing results.
You must compensate (somehow) for the difference between the actual sensitivity and the wanted results. With film, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with chemical energy, by increased (push) processing. With a sensor, you can compensate for insufficient photonic energy with amplification of the signal. The same is true for excessive photonic energy. You must compensate for the deviation in exposure level from desirable.
answered 7 hours ago
StanStan
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
StanStan
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
StanStan
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
StanStan
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
4,8439 silver badges24 bronze badges
Note that natural logs (ln) are used (base 2) to preserve the ½X, 2X relationships that we relate to whole "stops."
– Stan
7 hours ago
2
to understand you correctly. Let's say box ISO is 400, as long as I compensate in development, the setting ISO to 800 in external light meter is equivalent to setting ISO 800 camera. Right?
– neversaint
4 hours ago
2
@neversaint Equivalent? No. Close maybe. The result will always be a concession, more or less. I used 'compensate' to suggest your results may vary.
– Stan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Note that natural logs (ln) are used (base 2) to preserve the ½X, 2X relationships that we relate to whole "stops."
– Stan
7 hours ago
2
to understand you correctly. Let's say box ISO is 400, as long as I compensate in development, the setting ISO to 800 in external light meter is equivalent to setting ISO 800 camera. Right?
– neversaint
4 hours ago
2
@neversaint Equivalent? No. Close maybe. The result will always be a concession, more or less. I used 'compensate' to suggest your results may vary.
– Stan
3 hours ago
Note that natural logs (ln) are used (base 2) to preserve the ½X, 2X relationships that we relate to whole "stops."
– Stan
7 hours ago
Note that natural logs (ln) are used (base 2) to preserve the ½X, 2X relationships that we relate to whole "stops."
– Stan
7 hours ago
2
2
to understand you correctly. Let's say box ISO is 400, as long as I compensate in development, the setting ISO to 800 in external light meter is equivalent to setting ISO 800 camera. Right?
– neversaint
4 hours ago
to understand you correctly. Let's say box ISO is 400, as long as I compensate in development, the setting ISO to 800 in external light meter is equivalent to setting ISO 800 camera. Right?
– neversaint
4 hours ago
2
2
@neversaint Equivalent? No. Close maybe. The result will always be a concession, more or less. I used 'compensate' to suggest your results may vary.
– Stan
3 hours ago
@neversaint Equivalent? No. Close maybe. The result will always be a concession, more or less. I used 'compensate' to suggest your results may vary.
– Stan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f110174%2fcan-external-light-meter-replace-the-need-for-push-pull%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
You've asked a number of questions now on pushing and pulling film, and I wonder if you understand the ISO rating of a film. "Digital natives" treat ISO as just another variable parameter when setting exposure, but it does not work like that with film! You should respect the ISO of your film. Load film, and treat the ISO as fixed at box speed. Use aperture and shutter speed to control exposure. Forget about pushing/pulling film for now - you are setting yourself up for disappointing results. That's my opinion.
– osullic
11 hours ago
1
If you are photographing in conditions that are too dark (or too bright) for your film, well, that's a lesson of film photography. You either need to use a tripod for longer exposures, come back at a time when light levels are higher, or use a different film! You can't just "bump up the ISO" as you can with digital.
– osullic
11 hours ago