File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
A bottle, a candle, a light meter, a bluetooth headset (blue colored light) and my trusty camera is all that was needed to take this pic.

What does /p/ think?
>> Anonymous
It *really* bugs me that a bit of blue is clipped off to the right.

not bad otherwise. but seriously. uncrop that shit.
>> Anonymous
>>91333
Me too, you can imagine it turned 'just' off the image.
>> Anonymous
Do it again.
Looks like you hit the bottle. When you took the time to do all that you should have done it properly. Then it would have been very nice.
>> Anonymous
>>91333
Nothing a little photoshop couldn't handle

Otherwise this photo is awesome! Very good job using the light meter
>> Anonymous
light meters are for noobs.
>> Anonymous
>>91465

Uh no. Not so much. NOT having a light meter and not knowing how to use one makes YOU a newb. Professional photographers like Markus Klinko and Gilles Bensimon use light meters, that's how you get optimal lighting in a photo.
>> Anonymous
Are we talking light meters as in the handheld ones?
>> Anonymous
>>91467
real pros can look at a scene and know the light without use of a lightmeter.
>> Anonymous
>>91468
Qft. Buying a light meter is a good idea for anyone who's serious about photography.
>> Anonymous
>>91472
I can figure exposure for most scenes with my eyes; I can take a step out the door, glance around, and quote you a set of exposure settings instantly.

I still own and use a light meter for scenes where even the most experienced, most "professional" photographers can't figure exposure.

Ever shot a concert with complex stage lighting? You need a light meter. Ever shot a studio scene with an elaborate lighting set up? You need a light meter. Ever worked with the Zone System? You need a light meter. Ever bothered to actually give a care about your results? I'm guessing not. If I'm stepping outside to go shooting, I'll estimate the exposure and set it, sure. But then I'll spotmeter the highlight, shadows, and midtones; I'll take a test shot and look at the histogram.
>> Anonymous
>>91472

hate to break it to ya but real pros use light meters too. Everyone knows human eyes aren't as accurate as a digital handheld.
>> Anonymous
>>91472

hate to break it to ya but real pros use light meters too. Everyone knows human eyes aren't as accurate as a digital handheld.
>> Anonymous
>>91474
actually yeah i do shoot concerts with weird lighting. you get a baseline then adjust accordingly as the lights change. you cant go up there and lightmeter all the time during the show. lightmeter might be more accurate, but if you get to know your camera, you can know how it is in relation to how you should be shooting.
>> Anonymous
this photo could have done without the blue streak. it was poorly done here. properly done, could be neat to have with the light playing through he bottle and stuff, but its just poorly done in this shot.
>> Anonymous
>>91477
And how do you get a baseline? You meter. Takes maybe one or two more seconds to throw your camera into CWA and point it at the singer's face.

I usually don't use a handheld meter; the spotmeter on my camera works well enough. But I do spotmeter different areas and check a histogram whenever I have the time, preferably being able to "expose to the right," and when I don't, I use centerweighted average on the area I want rendered as a midtone.
>> Anonymous
>>91485
ive shot enough shows where in that situation i can do it right almost everytime now. spot metering doesnt help when wheres no people on stage to get the baseline from, so you get used to it by looking at the lights and you know what to use.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Why the hell would anyone use an external light meter with a digital camera?

Use the camera's built in meter. Chimp. If it's wrong, adjust.
>> Anonymous
>>91491
They're more precise. It's not really necessary and I wouldn't buy one, but if you can borrow one it's good to use sometimes.
>> Anonymous
>>91491

Quite true in many cases. While I still think they are useful even now with digital if you want reliable results and a high degree of control, you could still chimp and get there eventually without having to buy expensive light meters. Sometimes it's hard to get a good look through the camera screen. I suppose a laptop would solve that problem and a cheap laptop can cost the same as a light meter.
>> Anonymous !MjcMqTX/iM
'Cause digital camera's only measure reflective light. Light meters for studio work = <3
>> sage sage
Oh, and sage for cliché long exposure picture that isn't even nice, and still has a pretentious huge-ass logo on it.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
my only commment or suggestion would be better lighting behind the bottle...

dont have access to me computer at the moment so i apologise for just saying shit and not showing shizzle
>> Anonymous
>>91465
>>91472
>>91476
Great troll, or greatest troll?
>> Anonymous
>>91474

you mean, you can figure out sunny 16 with your bare eyes? reveal your secrets, super zen photo mastar!

light meters are pretty crucial for studio work, but the ability to crank out a shot for 16 different EV in about one minute make light meters irrelevant for everything else in this.. this digital age of ours.

minolta color meters, though? them's some useful electronix.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>91562
unless youre a retro fag like me and have 2 TLRs on the way and working on getting a largeformat locally.
I could hardly tell you what time it is, much less the lighting conditions of anywhere.
Light meters are for special needs photographers like me.
>> Anonymous
>>91570

it's easy. i'll help you. start with sunny 16, and work down from there.

in full daylight, at f/16 your shutter speed is whatever your ASA speed is.

hazy sunlight? add a stop. overcast but still bright? add two stops. heavy overcast? add three stops.

subject in open shade? add three stops.

really, really dark shade? add four stops.

indoors? add eight to ten stops. depends on the lighting.

if you think about it, you're only really ever shooting in a 12-stop range. it's just a matter of knowing where you stand.

but, yes, meters are necessary for tlr and large format. i was talking more about dslrs, though.
>> Anonymous
>>91574

haha, I just keep my f/stop two-4 stops up from whatever the base of the lens is, then increase (or decrease) the shutter speed to make things come out exposed right. Usually with iso 200-400. Keeps things simple for me, but then again, I'm no pro.
>> Anonymous
>>91574
I never use Sunny 16, actually. It's experience from doing all that metering and paying attention to what it says. I learned how to estimate exposure before I learned the different stops.
>> Anonymous
>>91623

>I learned how to estimate exposure before I learned the different stops.

lolwut? how did you set exposure without knowing what a stop was?
>> Anonymous
>>91629
guesstimation!
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>91629

Play around with the dial. I used to do it all the time, till i figured out what everything meant- i.e. my dad said "this is what those numbers mean" .
>> pskaught
I really like this picture by the way...
but without exif, I can not trust it.
>> Anonymous
>>91629
I knew what a stop was, and how aperture affected exposure and depth of field.

I didn't know the scale right. I thought that f/4 was half of f/8, etc. and when my calculations from that were visibly, obviously off I just bucked the whole idea of converting exposure between stops until recently, and along the way I shot and metered enough situations to get an intuitive feel for exposure.
>> Anonymous
If you guys are fans of photography, you guys suck my ass. You guys are insulting eachother as much talking ACTUAL photo stuff. This is why I hate 4-channers.
>> Anonymous
>>92023

and we hate you too ;D
>> Anonymous
EXIF or it didn't happen
>> Anonymous
>>92036
tonight, /p/ belongs to you good sir