Is my light meter relevant?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

...The reason I asked my original question is that, comfortable as I am with the screen as a guide, ideally I want to be able to just know what settings are right for what light, to be able to take even JPEGs that work. To that end, I'm thinking of buying a handheld light meter and just hanging out with it, even between taking photos, and getting a feel for the right settings for different light situations that way. My brain is profoundly unmathematical, so calculating things in my head is not going to work - I have to make it instinctive...

---

I doubt that an incident light meter will get you there. Though from a photography perspective the more you understand light the better.

The simplest, most basic thing to understand towards your desired end is the old f16 rule. I suspect if you've been doing some reading that you've run across it. That's a good basis from which to base the intuitive "metering" that you seek. The f16 rule is based on clear skies in middle latitude regions. If the scene contains white/bright highlights the rule is modified to f22 as the basis. On the other hand if you're trying to keep shadow detail, f11. Slightly filtered overcast with still distinct shadows, f11. Overcast with indistinct shadows makes the basis f8. Heavy enough overcast for no shadow, f5.6.

Regarding the math, you can simply count stops from the base f16 rule on your fingers. I do it that way all the time and I have above average math skills. If you want different settings than the basic f16 and ss at 1/ISO, you simply step ss and aperture in opposite directions by equal amounts.

I shoot in manual mode 99 percent of the time and the old f16 rule (modified for conditions) is where I start every lighting decision. Then I fire a test shot or two, check the histogram, and adjust. I do still use the light meter in the camera but just as a quick reference to see if I'm "between the ditches".

I do have to retract what I said in my first post. Based on your further comments it sounds like you have a desire to understand lighting and exposure in some detail. To achieve that you really should start understanding light metering and how to use a histogram. The method you're using is a crutch and is fine if you just want to successfully take the occasional snap shot. But if you want to really understand photography, you need to understand light and how to quantify it in order to translate it to camera settings. Quantifying it doesn't have to mathematical, it can be intuitive. But you need to develop that understanding rather than relying completely on electronics. After all, the electronics will change if/when you change equipment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

. . . I'm using a Fujifilm X-70. Sure, in very bright sunshine it can be difficult to see what's showing on the screen, but usually that's not a problem. I always shoot in RAW, and rely on Lightroom to fix any exposure mistakes I've made. I actually tend to purposely underexpose, because it's much safer than accidentally overexposing and losing detail.

---

I consider that a flawed workflow.

I think that a better approach is to record as much usable data as possible and then nuance the final image to your liking. In one sentence: that is what ETTR is all about - getting as much usable data as possible into the raw file. I suggest you take primary note of Donald’s advice.

Lightroom is to ‘nuance’, not to “fix” errors of exposure.

The Fuji X-70 shares some design elements and specifications with the X-100 and X-100s. I’ve used extensively an X-100 and my current X-100s has been my most used camera in this last year, probably 18 months.

A simple technique for you to use, so that you achieve ETTR in mostly all lighting conditions, would be to set the Metering Mode to MULTIZONE (icon is a DOT, surrounded by a CIRCLE, surrounded by a RECTANGLE.

THEN - If you are using an Automatic Mode (“AE- P”; “AE-S”; or “AE-A”) then set EXPOSURE COMPENSATION to +⅓ (PLUS ONE THIRD). Obviously if you are using Manual Made (“M”), then you set the Light Meter indicator to the +⅓ position.

Using this method, if you want to, you can also view the HISTOGRAM before shooting so that you can become more acquainted with the information that the HISTOGRAM conveys to you for different lighting scenarios.

Do NOT use the example HISTOGRAMS in your camera’s USER MANUAL as a guide to what is the “correct” exposure.

***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

Is my light meter relevant?

---

To answer the thread's title: Yes, your light meter is most relevant.

You have a light meter and for that matter it is a very good one – it is inside your camera: I consider that there is no need to buy an Hand Held Light Meter at this stage of your journey.

I also (strongly) concur with the advice to, at the bare minimum, understand the principles of F/16 Rule and all it mains variants – those main variants being:

> side-light (+1)
> back-light (+2)

AND

> snow and beach (-1)
> light cloud (+1)
> moderate cloud (+2)
> heavy cloud (+3)

The camera that you have is designed to view the scene on a relatively large screen – this is mainly for the purposes of COMPOSITION – the screen is NOT there for you to make critical exposure assessments based upon the brightness or darkness of the elements of the scene as viewed on the screen.

I suggest that you use the very sophisticated tools that you have, in the manner as the designers and technicians developed them:

> Use the Lightmeter in your camera – Multizone Mode is very smart mostly all of the time and there will be little need to ‘fix’ exposure errors.

> Use the histogram to check that you are producing a raw image that is ETTR – that is - getting as much usable data in the file – there will be the odd lighting scenario where the Multizone Mode doesn’t perform adequately – so monitor the Histogram and learn to understand what the light meter is telling you.

> Use that big moveable screen to concentrate on the COMPOSITION of the image.

> Use Lightroom to nuance the end result – not to “fix errors”

*

BUT . . . BEFORE doing all that – use your eyes to “see” the light as it falls on the scene and then put your camera at the best viewpoint to capture it. . .

WW

I think buying an incident meter would be a waste of money. The dominant threads in this discussion are (1) that it would be well worth your time to understand exposure better, and (2) that using the appearance of the image on the lcd is a poor indication of the quality of the exposure. Whatever the pros and cons of using an incident light meter, you can address both of these with the meter that is built into your camera.

When you use a reflected-light meter, which is what all in-camera meters are, you have an additional complication: from what surface should you take the reflected light? That is the point of the various metering modes, such as spot metering, center-weighted averaging, evaluative, etc. (I don't know what Fuji calls these.) However, learning about these helps one learn about exposure. I'll just give one example. Suppose you have a very high-contrast scene, and you decided that the most important thing is not blowing out the brightest areas. You can handle that by metering the light off one of those areas--using spot metering--which would set the exposure for those areas to neutral gray. You obviously don't want them as neutral gray, so to brighten them, you would increase exposure. You might try 2 stops or 3 to start, then check the histogram and adjust as necessary.

There are certainly times when an incident-light meter simplifies things, but I haven't used one in a long time, probably 40 years.

NorthernFocus Dan, Bill, DanK Dan

Thanks for the advice, especially the very practical bits, which are worth their weight in gold. I had read about the Sunny 16 Rule, but to be honest it sounded so simplistic, I didn't take it that seriously. I'll definitely take it on board and start putting the in-camera tools to work.

About the incident light meter, actually the Sekonic L-478D, for example, has a viewfinder accessory for measuring reflected light, too, and can also be calibrated to the camera being used. But, the 16-rule sounds more straightforward, more portable, and a lot cheaper!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

I am reading the excellent Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson...

---

Hi David and welcome to the forum from another Fuji shooter.

If you like Peterson's book, make sure to check the video tutorials on his website:

http://bpsop.com/category/photography-tips/

If you follow the instructions in the book on how to register, you will be able to see how some images in the book were made. I think I enjoyed his videos even more than the book.

With the histogram, remember that it is constructed from the image shown on the LCD. This means that it will be affected by all JPEG settings (even when you shoot RAW only). Also, the histogram will not be very helpful, for example, when a flash is used - you will need to check the histogram of the recorded image in the playback mode.

"Exposure preview in manual mode". If it is OFF, the histogram in the manual mode is decoupled from the exposure indicator, the little linear scale that you called "light meter" in the OP. This way the brightness of the LCD is optimised so the photographer can see what he is shooting, not to assess the exposure. Turn this feature ON if you want to use histogram in the manual mode. As others already mentioned, the Aperture priority mode is probably more convenient to use than full manual. With my Fuji cameras (which are a bit old and do not have "Exposure preview in manual mode" option), I use aperture priority 80% of the time and go full manual mainly when working with a flash.

Make sure to try in-camera raw conversion and have a play with JPEG settings. In particular, if you change "shadows" and "highlights", the appearance of the image on the LCD in the shooting mode will change a lot, as will the histogram. For example, setting "shadows" to -2 ("low") rather than to 0 ("standard") will brighten up the shadows and will make framing and focusing in difficult light much easier. These JPEG settings do not affect the RAW file in any way. With "highlights" set to 0 ("standard") and film simulation set to Provia (I always use Provia) you will get about 1/2 a stop more headroom in RAW than in JPEG - if JPEG is overexposed by about 1/2 a stop, the corresponding RAW file will still be fine. If you set "highlights" to -2 ("low"), the JPEG will now clip at about the same point as the RAW file. Personally, I use "shadows = -1" and "highlights = 0" because these settings give me nice contrasty ready-to-use JPEGs straight out of the camera 80% of the time.

One more tip. If you want to review images on camera's LCD and check for sharpness etc, shoot "RAW + Fine JPEG" rather than "RAW only". Otherwise when in playback mode you zoom in to check the focus, you will be looking at a low resolution JPEG embedded in the raw file.

Hope this will be of some help.
Dem.

Hi Dem,

Thanks for the welcome.

Quote:

---

If you like Peterson's book, make sure to check the video tutorials on his website

---

I'll definitely do that. I very much want to see in detail how others create their images.

Quote:

---

"Exposure preview in manual mode". If it is OFF, the histogram in the manual mode is decoupled from the exposure indicator, the little linear scale that you called "light meter" in the OP. This way the brightness of the LCD is optimised so the photographer can see what he is shooting, not to assess the exposure. Turn this feature ON if you want to use histogram in the manual mode.

---

Are you saying that when "Exposure preview in manual mode" is OFF, the histogram is affected by settings, but the exposure meter isn't, taking its cue just from the light coming in through the lens? So when the "Exposure preview in manual mode" is ON the histogram and exposure meter both take their cue from the light as modified by the settings? Sorry, I'm a bit confused here.

Quote:

---

Make sure to try in-camera raw conversion

---

I have read a bit about this in the manual, but to me it seemed like a clunky "manual" way of doing what I'd be doing later in Lightroom anyway, so I didn't take much notice. What are the advantages?

Quote:

---

have a play with JPEG settings

---

Now, that's something I have overlooked. I'll definitely start playing around with them. It sounds like a good way to help define a personal style. (As fate would have it, my camera suddenly developed a spot, seemingly on the sensor, yesterday, so I had to take it in and will be without it for another week or so - but as soon as it comes back...)

Hi David
You've been given more than enough advice from seasoned photographers to need my input, but I did want to say that I understand why you deliberately underexpose because I used to do that myself, after reading lots of threads about saving highlights and "how to recover blown highlights" etc. I got a bit paranoid about it. I also wanted to make "rich" photographs (I know- don't laugh), so I would deliberately set my exp. comp. to -0.7 e.v. "to bring out the colours." :confused:
I sent a few of my shots to a member of another forum and he immediately pointed out that they were underexposed, so I setup a very simple experiment. I locked off a tripod and took the same shot under the same conditions with exp. comp from -1 to +1 at which point I definitely started to get blown highlights. Looking at these shots it was quite clear that the amount of detail in the shots exposed at +0.3 and +0.7 was far superior, with the +1 too blown for comfort. I then adjust the exp. comp. in post and never looked back.
As most of us do I set my exp. comp. depending on the environment I am shooting in, but do try to get 'the most exposure I can get away with'. My camera is quite consistent, but when I check shots I usually also check the histogram and adjust if necessary. If I find myself in an environment where the light levels can change dramatically, I tend to toggle my exp. comp. dial as I go.

So, yes, I'd say the metering of your camera is very relevant, but it is also not infallible and the best way to check it is through the histogram. My camera also has 'blinkers' which come up when reviewing the file, showing blown highlights and black points, which I find very helpful. In fact, I tend to check for blinkers first and when there aren't any, I check the histogram to educate myself about it. Don't be worried about changing settings frequently. I sometimes find myself having to do this very frequently, depending on where I'm shoooting, e.g. wandering through semi-open markets with half-roofs and stalls set both in deep shade and strong sunlight, connected by unlit corridors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

. . . About the incident light meter, actually the Sekonic L-478D, for example, has a viewfinder accessory for measuring reflected light, too, and can also be calibrated to the camera being used. But, the 16-rule sounds more straightforward, more portable, and a lot cheaper!

---

Sekonic make excellent Meters.

The model referenced has many features, possibly never used by 99% of still Photographers. The purchase price includes, but is not limited to: Flash Meter, Frame Rate and Shutter Angle for Cine; and Camera Profiling - these (and other features) are some that many Still Photographers would not use.

Specifically the "viewfinder accessory" (which is possibly an addition purchase) is very close to, but not actually a "Spot Meter".

The Light Meter that you already have in your Fuji X-70 is, in this aspect, is a more sophisticated Light Meter for reflected light. It has THREE settings - MULTIZONE; AVERAGE and also a 2 degree angle "SPOT Meter" (i.e. the Fuji ‘s 2 degree angle is narrower, more defined and thus more accurate as a "spot" meter than the 5 degree angle on the Sekonic).

***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dem

. . . Make sure to try in-camera raw conversion and have a play with JPEG settings. In particular, if you change "shadows" and "highlights", the appearance of the image on the LCD in the shooting mode will change a lot, as will the histogram.

---

This point is important. It goes to the fact that HISTOGRAMS are not necessarily a definitive of what comprises the raw File. In most (all?) cameras, the JPEG file drives the HISTOGRAM's appearance. And the in-camera JPEG post production settings produce the JPEG File.

Post #22 ignored this fact and simply suggested and EC of plus one-third of a Stop, based upon knowledge of Fuji's "X-Series" Metering Modes.

If you choose to use Fuji's MULTIZONE METERING MODE, whatever in-camera JPEG Post Production settings happen to be, provided that they are not changed, the resultant HISTOGRAMS will be relevant for your comparative purposes.

WW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William W

and Camera Profiling - these (and other features) are some that many Still Photographers would not use.

---

Hey Bill - I've just made profiles for my 7D MkII and 5DS and loaded them into the newly purchased L-758 DR Sekonic meter!

I agree that I've been managing fine with just the camera meters, but having been introduced to studio lighting through a course run by a fellow student and having invested in some lights, I've also got the meter. I've watched what I think are probably some of the most informative videos on using it and now feel as if I know what I'm doing. It is a mighty tool with which I'm hugely impressed. And it most certainly absolutely nails the exposure, particularly across those landscape images in which there is a pretty high dynamic range.

I'm really enjoying using it. But certainly up until this point in my photographic life, a time when I feel I can call myself an experienced and pretty knowledgeable photographer capable of making decent images, I wouldn't have done this meter any justice. I don't say this with any sense of 'superiority', but it really is a tool for the more advanced photographer.

Hi Steve,
Thanks for your exposure tale - it very much resonates with me because that's exactly how I've been: afraid of losing half my data to the snowy void, and also, I guess, subscribing to the (seductive) "richness" theory of underexposure as well. I'll be resolutely ETTR from hereon in. I haven't found a way of making the X-70 show "blinkers" but will look into that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

I haven't found a way of making the X-70 show "blinkers" but will look into that.

---

Just had a quick look through the Owners Manual. I don't see that there is an option to show 'blinkies' on that camera. But that's fine. It just becomes a case then of learning to read the histogram and of using it all the time when setting an exposure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William W

The Light Meter that you already have in your Fuji X-70 is, in this aspect, is a more sophisticated Light Meter for reflected light.

---

New respect for my cam.

Quote:

---

In most (all?) cameras, the JPEG file drives the HISTOGRAM's appearance.

---

Just to clarify, are you saying that the histogram results are filtered by the JPEG settings the user has made? For example, the wider you set the dynamic range, the more readily the histogram will fill from right to left for the same aperture/SS/ISO?

This is just me, but meters are from an era before we had liveview with exposure simulation. :D Like you, I often find exposure simulation to be more accurate than relying on the meter needle, because I can get a more accurate rendering of what the final image will be like, straight from the sensor. But like others in this thread, I will also often consult the live histogram (or the not-live histogram and blinkies afterwards while chimping) to judge whether or not I may have captured less usable data than I thought. Shooting RAW and processing in post gives you experience by which to judge whether or not you've maximized your data and how deceptive previews, histograms, blinkies, and meters can be, depending on your tastes.

Fuji's JPEG engine, however, can often produce lovely straight-out-of-camera results, so learning about RAW headroom and all of that may be a moot thing, depending on what you want to accomplish and how much time you want to spend dinking about with sliders in Lightroom. Frankly, Fuji's Classic Chrome setting can accomplish a color palette I love to see that I find difficult to do on my own in post. It's all about what you want to accomplish and what you find are the best/most convenient tools for how you work. But, it's typically best to try out all the tools available so you know you're choosing what works best for you in a given situation, rather than simply falling into habits because you didn't learn your camera controls. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donald

Hey Bill - I've just made profiles for my 7D MkII and 5DS and loaded them into the newly purchased L-758 DR Sekonic meter!

I've watched what I think are probably some of the most informative videos on using it and now feel as if I know what I'm doing. It is a mighty tool with which I'm hugely impressed. And it most certainly absolutely nails the exposure, particularly across those landscape images in which there is a pretty high dynamic range.

---

Donald,

I'm intrigued by your reference to "some of the most informative videos". Are these ones which are available online?

Indeed. Particularly those from Mark Wallace (for Adorama and independently) and by Joe Brady (for Sekonic and independently).

Some of those I found very useful are:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4iiKcuv_is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5rQJ-MTJio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1GsGfPeOc4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW8vELDb9Eo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C5s8bapVEs

I found these particularly helpful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inkista

This is just me, but meters are from an era before we had liveview with exposure simulation.

---

None of my DSLRs have that capability and my most recent purchase was made just 3 1/2 years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Buckley

None of my DSLRs have that capability and my most recent purchase was made just 3 1/2 years ago.

---

Mike if I'm not mistaken you are a Nikon user (as am I these days). But I used to shoot with a Canon and I have to say that Nikon is way behind the eight ball with it's Live View functionality. Canon has had exposure simulation for quite some time but not so with Nikon.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Buckley

None of my DSLRs have that capability and my most recent purchase was made just 3 1/2 years ago.

---

That's surprising. Even my old Canon 50D had it.

Dave is correct that Nikon is way behind when it comes to displaying a histogram of LiveView. I first saw it at least five years ago on a camera made neither by Nikon nor Canon that was technologically inferior to and less expensive than my prosumer Nikon camera in every other way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

Are you saying that when "Exposure preview in manual mode" is OFF, the histogram is affected by settings, but the exposure meter isn't?

---

No. They are both affected by JPEG settings. I was saying that the histogram is not connected to the exposure indicator. Try changing shutter speed in the manual mode - the exposure indicator moves up and down the scale, the histogram does not change. The histogram is shown not for the image you are about to take but for the image currently displayed on the LCD. Take some test shots when the exposure indicator is at +2, 0, -2 and compare the histograms of the recorded images to the histogram you saw on the LCD just before pressing the shutter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

So when the "Exposure preview in manual mode" is ON the histogram and exposure meter both take their cue from the light as modified by the settings?

---

Either ON or OFF, they always do. But when it is ON, you see the actual histogram of the image you are about to record and when it is OFF, you see the histogram of the "optimal" image when the exposure indicator is showing zero. I do not know why Fuji thought that this was a good idea. They also do not tell us how the position of the exposure indicator is calculated in the manual mode (but I bet it is from "average" metering). In aperture priority, there are several options of how to assign the desired exposure level. For example, the same histogram can be achieved with say using
1) face detection
2) spot metering off something white +2EV
3) spot metering off something black -2EV
4) average metering +0.5EV
So the position of the exposure indicator depends a lot on the metering mode, not the histogram alone. All this is gone in the manual mode and replaced by a little tick moving up and down.

I suppose the main point here is, if you want to rely on the in-camera light meter, do not use manual mode or at least turn the exposure preview ON.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tripbeetle

I have read a bit about this in the manual, but to me it seemed like a clunky "manual" way of doing what I'd be doing later in Lightroom anyway, so I didn't take much notice. What are the advantages?

---

I just meant that certain JPEG settings can improve the clarity of the image on camera's LCD and also shift the histogram in case you are doing ETTR and mainly interested in RAW files. And the quickest way of finding that out is by using the in-camera RAW converter: take one shot, covert it using different JPEG settings, toggle between the JPEG images to see the effect. I didn't suggest changing your workflow and developing all RAWs in camera :)