Tiger Johnson wrote:
how do you normally do it when using a handheld meter under natural light?

Of course meter both but what reading do you set the camera to?

the answer is neither.

there is much more to metering than just metering for shadows or metering for highlights.

the correct answer is meter for your desired exposure. 

shooting for a histogram that is crammed to the right isn't the right answer either.

the reason you meter for both the highlights and shadows is so you can properly visualize your tonal curve BEFORE you take the shot.  what will be in shadow?  what will be blown out?  what will my midtone contrast look like?

if you are simply taking the light meter in front of the model's nose and pointing it towards the camera then you need to learn more about the basics of exposure and you are wasting the $300 you spent on the light meter to begin with.

Tiger Johnson wrote:
thanks for the info.

I'm using an incident meter with negative color/B&W film.  Would that change any of the rules?

If the meter is strictly ambient/incident. then understand that the reading will be based on the settings required to expose 18% grey properly. As a result you'll have to visualize how many zones away your shadow or desired highlights are and expose properly. Also with negative film when in doubt overexpose a little bit, this way you least guarantee yourself some shadow detail. It's somewhat the opposite with positive.

Also make sure that you are using an incident meter correctly. The white dome faces the camera, not the subject. Because what you are metering is the light falling onto the subject. Its best to place the meter roughly where the subject is facing where the camera is pointing from. But basically the settings depend on whether or not you want the darker areas more, or the brighter areas.

Sean Armenta wrote:
...
if you are simply taking the light meter in front of the model's nose and pointing it towards the camera then you need to learn more about the basics of exposure and you are wasting the $300 you spent on the light meter to begin with.

A meter is an aid, there is of course the knowledge behind their readings in how to utilize them so no need to bash him. Secondly he could have spend less than 30$ for a gossen LunaSix, not 300$ or in my case 40$ for a Minolta Autometer IVf.

He could just stick it in front of the model nose. Take note of the expose, and then figure "ok, is the model completion light enough to warrant stopping down, is the clothing too dark, do I want details here?" and so forth.

Simply put you expose for the range you wish to capture detail as I've already said.

D. Brian Nelson wrote:
Neither highlights nor shadows.  I incident meter. 

I'm not sure what the point is of a hand-held meter if all you do with it is reflected metering.  An in-camera meter can do reflected metering just fine.

-Don

Or a grey card in front of the camera to 'fake' incident metering.

The benefit of incident metering ( as you already know ) is that it cannot be fooled by things such as strong backlight, or subject density. Alot of times if you are submitting artwork to a gallery or university they require you to use incident metering and only to go off that setting onto slides so that the darkness/brightness in the subject or piece being submitted is accurately represented.

A. KAYE wrote:
DEPENDS,
GONNA PRINT FOR THE HIGHLIGHT OR THE SHADOW ?

What does one know about metering if they cannot even figure out how to turn off the caps lock?

Sean Armenta wrote:
the answer is neither.

there is much more to metering than just metering for shadows or metering for highlights.

the correct answer is meter for your desired exposure. 

shooting for a histogram that is crammed to the right isn't the right answer either.

the reason you meter for both the highlights and shadows is so you can properly visualize your tonal curve BEFORE you take the shot.  what will be in shadow?  what will be blown out?  what will my midtone contrast look like?

if you are simply taking the light meter in front of the model's nose and pointing it towards the camera then you need to learn more about the basics of exposure and you are wasting the $300 you spent on the light meter to begin with.

yes please dont bash me because I'm still learning about exposure.  I find the easiest way to do this is by using a handheld meter.  My camera doesn't have a meter so I picked up a Minolta 4f for $125  (not $300).

But I do feel like I should listen to you since there are some stunning images in your profile.  Any more advice would be appreciated.

Karl Blessing wrote:
If digital or slide/transparency, you meter (reflective) the brightest area you wish to retain detail, then open up 2 stops from there or so.

He means to close 2 stops. Don't try to open 2 stops from the highlights.

Tiger Johnson wrote:
I'm using an incident meter with negative color/B&W film.  Would that change any of the rules?

Yes, an incident meter is use differently from the reflected meters these answers refer to.

The incident meter measures the amount of light falling on to the subject. You just hold the meter in the light at the subject position and point the dome in the direction of the camera. You don't have to worry about shadow and highlight. But you have to have experience to know if hot highlights are an issue (close 1 stop) or if the shadows are important (open 1-2 stops if no hot highlights).

As has been said, you expose slightly differently for negative than positive (transparency or digital). You have to spend lots of time experimenting to get what you prefer. If the highlights are not hot, you usually open up a bit for the shadows with negatives.

Read Ansel Adams: The Negative or some books on the zone system.

Karl Blessing wrote:
If digital or slide/transparency, you meter (reflective) the brightest area you wish to retain detail, then open up 2 stops from there or so.

Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
He means to close 2 stops. Don't try to open 2 stops from the highlights.

No I mean open, because we're talking transparency/Digital here. Meaning if you meter for highlight everything else would be darker, then you open up 2 stops or so from there to make the metered highlight the brightest (but detailed) area in the image.

To understand more what I say when I say open, if the highlights would represent middle grey at 1/125th f/8, then you want to open 2 stops by going possibly 1/30 @ f/8 or 1/125 @ f/4

If metering shadow as middle grey, at 1/125 @ f/8, then you would close down 2 by going 1/500 @ f/8, or 1/125 @ f/16.

But of course some personal preference on whether or not you'd rather knock out that dark area, or to fudge the setting a little to keep some tone in some other zone.

David Allen Smith wrote:
In camera meter is worthless for anything with strobes.

When my hand held meter went dead I used the histogram to shoot with my strobes. It worked ok but was less than ideal.

Marko Cecic-Karuzic wrote:
A little bit of useful info and a whole lot of useless crap. This is pretty damn fundamental, guys!

To the OP... easiest way to get the straight skinny on this is to read a book. You're just going to get confused listening to the valid info from a few posters and a whole lotta crap besides.

Yup, exactly! Or just talk to someone you trust, and have them expline to you the basics. Then ask them more questions when you know all that they have told you.
The biggest problem hear is that you do get good advice, but people have opinions, and personal preferences. These are based on the equipment used. You will form your own opinion based on your camera and light meter, as you get more comfortable with them.
I think Sean, and Karl have given you some good advice. Ask them if you can PM them with question in the future!
Damn! Light meters are really that inexpensive now! I paid upwards of $300 for my Sekonic
Jairo

Terry Breedlove wrote:
When my hand held meter went dead I used the histogram to shoot with my strobes. It worked ok but was less than ideal.

Yeah, that'll do in a pinch.

Not really "metering" but gets the job done.

Tiger Johnson wrote:
yes please dont bash me because I'm still learning about exposure.  I find the easiest way to do this is by using a handheld meter.  My camera doesn't have a meter so I picked up a Minolta 4f for $125  (not $300).

But I do feel like I should listen to you since there are some stunning images in your profile.  Any more advice would be appreciated.

i am in no way bashing you.  not even a little.  it's called being honest.  i don't see how what i said was an insult towards you.

the point is, you need to learn the basics of exposure and metering period.  no one or two paragraph post on this website by anybody will be able to fully explain this.  as marko mentioned, start by reading up on it.  there are a number of great resources available to you. 

if you followed advice that said, well if you're shooting on transparencies then meter for the highlights and if shooting negs then meter for your shadows, what did you learn?  nothing except how to increase the chances of something coming back from the lab and being able to make a print from it.  so you could keep shooting that way and never realize the full potential of proper exposure.  and if you're not satisfied with the results, where do you go from there?  nowhere because you're just given "either or" advice.

if you're shooting digital and take the advice of exposing to the right, well that's all well and good if the image has a complete presence of tones.  what if you're shooting a mostly black or dark scene and you shove your histogram to the right?  then what is supposed to be black is now grey to light grey.  and this is why i never rely on a histogram for exposure because it doesn't take into account what it is you are really exposing for.  all it is doing is mapping out brightness values from 0 to 255 on a linear graph.

look, at any rate there is no substitute for a strong grasp on the basics of photography.

Fotticelli wrote:
I haven't used any meters, flash or otherwise, since I've switched to digital. I don't even own a meter. My camera has this little screen on the back and I can see exactly what to set the camera to from the histogram and even take a test shot.

Which explains why the exposure on some of your images is close but not quite on.