This guy is is claiming perfect exposures using a non-incident TTL meter. JCO
> -----Original Message----- > From: whickersworld [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 6:54 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Exposure (WAS: Re: OK Survey time) > > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > >Weve been down this road before, unless your > aiming your camera at a full screen 18% reflectance > subject the meter will over or under expose > the subject. the only way you could be accurate > is if you manually compensated the meter reading > based on the KNOWN reflectance of the subject and > that is nearly always UNKNOWN. > > > > You could always use an incident meter to remove concerns > about the reflectance of the subject. > > Used correctly, incident meters measure (with a high degree > of accuracy) the illumination level at the subject. So one > might say that an incident meter reading is the nearest > thing to the objective "perfect exposure" that some here > appear to be seeking. > > However, that is not usually the case. The incident meter > reading can only inform the photographer, who will make > his/her choice of "perfect exposure" by adjusting that > reading to take account of his/her wish to retain detail in > shadows or highlights. That's partly because most films are > incapable of rendering the whole range of contrast of most > subjects/scenes, and partly because the definitive incident > reading may not provide the precise effect the photographer > is trying to achieve. > > John > > >
