Jump to content


Photo

exposure


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 01 December 2005 - 08:53 AM

hi all

my question is simple..given a EI number, say 200, how do you know what fstop will be the "middle gray", the fstop that places right in the middle of the curve?

thanks

freddy bonfanti

edinburgh college of art
  • 0

#2 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 01 December 2005 - 10:24 AM

hi all

my question is simple..given a EI number, say 200, how do you know what fstop will be the "middle gray", the fstop that places right in the middle of the curve?

thanks

freddy bonfanti

edinburgh college of art


Hi,

Using a light meter is a good start! Light meters are calibrated to between 12% and 18%.
If you have not got one and its a sunny day try f32 at 25 fps.

Stephen
  • 0

#3 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19761 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 December 2005 - 10:55 AM

Don't you have a light meter?

If you're in full sunlight, I know it's always about f/16 to f/16.5 at 50 ASA / 24 fps / 180 degree shutter.

The other rule is that 100 footcandles = f/2.8 with 100 ASA film (24 fps / 180 degrees). But even that rule requires a light meter.
  • 0

#4 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 01 December 2005 - 11:42 AM

If you don't have a stand-alone lightmeter, you can use the onboard lightmeter of a 35mm SLR; they work just as well. Also, if you really want to nail down exposure, you can rent a professional polaroid camera, a MF camera with a pola back, or use a DSLR set at the same or near ISO to the stock you're using to evaluate its exposure characteristics. IMO polaroids are the quickest for really nailing down what aperture you want. If you have time though, you can do all kinds of specialized tests to really nail down lighting. SHoot a test roll with the same sky conditions that you'll want to shoot the actual shot with is the surest way to know that you'll get exactly what you want.

Regards.
~Karl Borowski
  • 0

#5 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 December 2005 - 12:16 PM

If you don't have a stand-alone lightmeter, you can use the onboard lightmeter of a 35mm SLR; they work just as well. Also, if you really want to nail down exposure, you can rent a professional polaroid camera, a MF camera with a pola back, or use a DSLR set at the same or near ISO to the stock you're using to evaluate its exposure characteristics. IMO polaroids are the quickest for really nailing down what aperture you want. If you have time though, you can do all kinds of specialized tests to really nail down lighting. SHoot a test roll with the same sky conditions that you'll want to shoot the actual shot with is the surest way to know that you'll get exactly what you want.

Regards.
~Karl Borowski



The polaroids and DSLRs will help you to evaluate exposure, but be aware that both have exposure lattitude different than that of negative film.
  • 0

#6 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 01 December 2005 - 02:58 PM

i do have a light meter, the only thing i didnt quite understand is that on the first measurement the reading was 2.8 so i have been suggested to get more light in order to achieve a reading of 4.0 ... thats what i didnt understand, why do i need a 4.0? is it maybe because of the lens i was using? (9 millimiter wide angle for a 16 mill arri sr2) maybe having a 4.0 was good to get more darker zones and therefore have a balanced shot...i think that must be the reason, i didnt ask why i just wanted to shoot since we had not time at all. having the aperture at 2.8 would have got me a overexposed shot since the middle grey would have been one stop more than the maximum aperture...

i am definitely loving my hard way to get to all this knowledge but i just need someone to tell me that was the case and my assumption was right

thanks
  • 0

#7 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19761 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 December 2005 - 03:29 PM

Well, it all depends on how and what you are metering, but assuming it was an incident meter and you were reading the main light on the subject, if it said "f/2.8" then that's the correct exposure for an average brightness where 18% gray would read as 18% gray, etc.

Now perhaps your particular lens did not look particularly good at f/2.8, hence the advice to get the key light up to f/4. Or perhaps your subject was a little dark compared to the surrondings, hence adding more light would have balanced it with the background. Once you added more light and then metered it and got an "f/4" then that would be the "correct" exposure to render the subject at average brightness.
  • 0

#8 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 01 December 2005 - 04:10 PM

Well, it all depends on how and what you are metering, but assuming it was an incident meter and you were reading the main light on the subject, if it said "f/2.8" then that's the correct exposure for an average brightness where 18% gray would read as 18% gray, etc.

Now perhaps your particular lens did not look particularly good at f/2.8, hence the advice to get the key light up to f/4. Or perhaps your subject was a little dark compared to the surrondings, hence adding more light would have balanced it with the background. Once you added more light and then metered it and got an "f/4" then that would be the "correct" exposure to render the subject at average brightness.





thanks mr mullen,

but if the right exposure was 2.8 i reckon i would have had the background out of focus so thats why they told me to get a 4.0, to get more depth of field..NOW I GET IT...i feel so stupid actually, it was so clear!

its always reveting and inspiring to get you people's replies, i feel like this forum is a sort of a teaching class!
  • 0


Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Metropolis Post

Opal

CineTape

Technodolly

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

CineLab

Visual Products

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Opal

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Wooden Camera

CineLab