|
|
  | 12 May 2012 01:26 |
|
| Glossypinklipstick Photographer  Location United Kingdom Essex Harlow | I have been setting up my studio flash settings using the pictogram lazily for many years and decided to do it properly using a seikonic flash meter. I watched the You tube videos from flash centre and took a reading and followed it. i set the settings into my camera and the result was about 2 stops under exposed. I checked it & rechecked it and ended up doing it by eye and ditched the meter. I checked the iso matched the meter but ive missed something or the meter is misreading:any ideas 2 elinchroms shooting through softboxes. I checked its daylight readings against the cameras meter and it seems there or there abouts. If i havnt missed anything, can i test it some how wihout having another flash meter to compare it against. |
|
| Paul www.glossypinklipstick.co.uk | ||
  | 12 May 2012 01:33 |
| Keltica Photographer  Location United Kingdom Middlesex Twickenham | What you see on the back of your camera, does not necessarily match how it looks when you import the image onto your PC/Laptop/Mac/Macbook. Are you X checking by looking at the image presented by the camera, or on your PC..... |
| 12 May 2012 01:40 |
| Bayrunner Photographer  Location United Kingdom Dorset Beaminster, W Dorset | One thing that has given me false readings in the past is that the lumisphere isnt totally obscuring the entry lens - thats on a Sekonic 308 |
| 12 May 2012 01:52 |
| paulcoxphotography Photographer  Location United Kingdom Greater Manchester | Make sure the flash meter is pointing directly toward the camera not the light source. The histogram is a good way of getting a well exposed file the light meter is best for measuring the ratio between light sources IMHO. |
| 12 May 2012 02:19 |
|
| Allinthemind Photographer  Location United Kingdom Gloucestershire | Sounds odd. Which meter? Did you switch to the flash mode? Have you got any filters on your lens? Is the main light fairly frontal? Did you pich the measure button, then let go, see the flash symbol flashing then fire the lights? Si |
|
| In the "Information Age", continued ignorance must be a choice motivated initially through inherited beliefs. | ||
| 12 May 2012 04:01 |
| oscar Photographer  Location United Kingdom Cheshire Nr Warrington | Which You tube video - link please. How are you firing the flash head? Which meter? Have you checked the battery? As previously mentioned is the disc fully in position? Are you measuring for one or two or more lights? From the models position? |
| 12 May 2012 05:02 |
|
| corbystock Photographer  Location United Kingdom Hampshire New Milton | what camera/settings? I only say this because i dropped a bollock once shooting jpeg but had D lighting enabled (D90). I also had two cameras once, 5d & d90 it was fine for the d90 but way under cooked for the 5d ( never got to the bottom of that one ). Another mistake was the dome not being in the correct position as suggested above. | |
| There is a chance that everything I just said is complete bollocks | ||
| 12 May 2012 06:09 |
| magpie1 Photographer Location United Kingdom Tyne and Wear Newcastle | In terms of "in camera" exposure accuracy the histogram is the only anywhere near accurate guide. If you are using the meter in incident mode it should be used with the dome, at the subject position, being careful that nothing is shading the dome, pointing towards the camera, you are measuring light incident upon the subject not the reflected light. Another thing to bear in mind is that the calibration of most meters is still in the 'film' bias, which tends to have an inherently wider dynamic range than most digital devices, commonly about (if you have a top end Phase One back it has enough headroom} some Sekonic meters allow quite elaborate calibration to match the meter to the camera, best used in reflected, particularly spot meter mode. |
| 12 May 2012 07:59 |
|
| Allinthemind Photographer Location United Kingdom Gloucestershire |  Quote from magpie1In terms of "in camera" exposure accuracy the histogram is the only anywhere near accurate guide. If you are using the meter in incident mode it should be used with the dome, at the subject position, being careful that nothing is shading the dome, pointing towards the camera, you are measuring light incident upon the subject not the reflected light. Another thing to bear in mind is that the calibration of most meters is still in the 'film' bias, which tends to have an inherently wider dynamic range than most digital devices, commonly about (if you have a top end Phase One back it has enough headroom} some Sekonic meters allow quite elaborate calibration to match the meter to the camera, best used in reflected, particularly spot meter mode. Pointing towards the camera will give good exposure on the 3d thing pointing rowards the camera, you need to take a view on the angle of the lightmeter depending on what you want to expose normally (I usually point halfway between main light and camera), using the flat plane can give measurements for the plane that you hold it parallel too. Lenses usually account for 1/3-1/2 stop of transmission loss, which you can take into account. Generally for Sekonic, if you open up 1/2 - 2/3rds of a stop, you'll be about right for a RAW shot. Si |
|
| In the "Information Age", continued ignorance must be a choice motivated initially through inherited beliefs. | ||
| 12 May 2012 08:11 |
| Andy_B Photographer  Location United Kingdom London London | The problem metering with the histogram is that on most cameras the histogram doesn't represent the actual range of RAW exposure values coming off the sensor - it represents the values after JPEG processing. This can give you an incorrect view of over/under exposure. That said, with a digital camera the actual image is a better guide to exposure than a light meter will ever be. Unless you're a luddite who only shoots JPEG and doesn't want to do any post-shoot correction, image capture is really an 'engineering problem' of trying to maximise the sensor's dynamic range by exposing to the right but avoiding too much clipping. This is different to the approach taken with film, and trying to match a light meter with an un-calibrated camera will often give poorer results. I agree with Paul - that the best use of light meters today is to understand lighting ratios. |
|
