Automatic vs. Manual?

[djacobox372]

U know, its not really manual if your camera has a light meter. U should try guessing exposure without looking at the meter, it makes u think and slow down, both good things.

 

[table1349]

U know, its not really manual if your camera has a light meter. U should try guessing exposure without looking at the meter, it makes u think and slow down, both good things.

If that is the criteria, then it is not really a manual camera if it has a shutter release or variable aperture. You should have to remove the lens cap and figure out how long to leave it off and live with what ever aperture your lens has.

 

[ann]

U know, its not really manual if your camera has a light meter. U should try guessing exposure without looking at the meter, it makes u think and slow down, both good things.

A long time ago , 40 years or more, we would practice learning to "read" the light without the use of the meter.

We would look at a scene, subject, what ever, announce what we would use and then check that against our meters. I had a friend to could "guess" down to 1/4 of a stop. Basically we started with what is known as the sunny 16 rule.

In fact for years, Kodak had recommendations posted on their film boxes about what numbers to use in varies lighting conditions.

Before that the directions were, sun behind the left shoulder, point and shoot, these box cameras were using around 1/125 @ f16. Lots of wonderful photos made that way.

Frankly I don't think it is guessing as it is training our brains . A lot of the old masters never used a light meter, they didn't exist but they managed ! .

 

[Joel_W]

U know, its not really manual if your camera has a light meter. U should try guessing exposure without looking at the meter, it makes u think and slow down, both good things.

Your kidding, right? The key is understanding exposure and applying it to the photograph you're presently taking. Why guess when you have the proper tool to do the job at hand?

 

[Joel_W]

U know, its not really manual if your camera has a light meter. U should try guessing exposure without looking at the meter, it makes u think and slow down, both good things.

A long time ago , 40 years or more, we would practice learning to "read" the light without the use of the meter.

We would look at a scene, subject, what ever, announce what we would use and then check that against our meters. I had a friend to could "guess" down to 1/4 of a stop. Basically we started with what is known as the sunny 16 rule.

In fact for years, Kodak had recommendations posted on their film boxes about what numbers to use in varies lighting conditions.

Before that the directions were, sun behind the left shoulder, point and shoot, these box cameras were using around 1/125 @ f16. Lots of wonderful photos made that way.

Frankly I don't think it is guessing as it is training our brains . A lot of the old masters never used a light meter, they didn't exist but they managed ! .

Ann, call it what you want, but it's guessing. You learned to guess when there weren't light meters, you came close, and you also blew a lot of shots. Also back in the good old days, we did a lot of correcting from miss guessing in the darkroom while printing our pictures.

A light meter is just a tool. Tools help you get the job done more efficiency, more quickly, and with repeatable results.

This is the same type of conversation one would have talking about why have a automatic transmission. we learned on a manual trany, or why have power steering, you loose the feel of the road. etc.

 

[BadPictures]

I tend to shoot manual because of an explanation I got in a class that I took. You can feel free to try this at home. Go outside during the day (i.e., not at night) and set your camera on one of the modes other than manual. Aim your camera so that the horizon is somewhere near halfway up the frame and take note of the exposure it chooses and take a picture of something in front of you. Then aim a little lower. As you remove bright the settings will change. Take another picture. What happened to the object in front of you now that is really the subject of your photo? Odds are you didn't get a consistent shot of that thing.

So the explanation given to me after that example is that the easiest way to get consistent results is to get a meter reading that ensures that your subject is lit appropriately and then leave the settings alone as long as the light doesn't change. Even if you have to take a shot or five before you take "The Shot" and chimp the histogram until you get it right, who cares? It's not like the film days where you are blowing through film, right? Take some trash shots in the location you're in and get your exposures right... then go looking for what you really want to shoot. So pretty much, you set it once... and until you change locations, you don't have to fiddle with exposure much or hope that the camera chooses something that works right for what you're trying to accomplish each time you hit the shutter. It'll just be right. I wish I could explain it as well as the instructor did that day, because I can tell you I went from always chasing the exposure and getting the occasional luck shot on program or aperture priority to most of my pictures being consistently well exposed. Whether they are good or not is another thing entirely, but at least they're not blown out or terribly dark when I don't want them to be.

After awhile I do seem to be able to 'guess' pretty closely what will be well lit and normally the first one or two test shots is pretty spot on.

 

[unpopular]

A lot of the old masters never used a light meter, they didn't exist but they managed ! .

This is a bit misleading for a few reasons. First of all, black and white film has way more effective latitude than digital and with many of these "old masters" contact printing grain is pretty insignificant except on the densest of negatives.

Second these films were orthochromatic, very, very slow and could very easily be developed by inspection under a dim incandescent light or flame. I don't know how many of the "old masters" developed by inspection, but I am guessing that this was a pretty common practice as soon as it was realized that the plates would not expose to red light - and because incandescence was the only light available at the time, I'd think they'd learn this very quickly.

Finally they did a LOT more chemical intensification and reduction back then, a practice which is almost completely lost today except in the case of missed exposure or some special scenarios.

As far as guessing within 1/4ev - maybe. But guessing how much light is available isn't nearly as useful as guessing how much light is being reflected, and that's a much harder thing to approximate - far from impossible, but much harder.

 

[unpopular]

And come to think of it, they also had these slide rules they'd carry around, they'd put in various variables like month, time of day, latitude and maybe some conditions about the atmosphere and get an approximate exposure.

So even if they did not have light meters, people still had tools available to guide exposure. I have no idea how commonly used they were.

Here is the Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actinograph

 

[Derrel]

And come to think of it, they also had these slide rules they'd carry around, they'd put in various variables like month, time of day, latitude and maybe some conditions about the atmosphere and get an approximate exposure.

So even if they did not have light meters, people still had tools available to guide exposure.

That type of "light meter" was called an "extinction meter". I had a beautiful old Bell & Howell 8mm key-wound movie camera that had a FANTASTIC, round, metal "calculator" or "slide-rule style" light meter that had the season of the year, and the hemisphere of the planet!!!, and then the proper f/stop to use at the various ASA settings, and it worked AMAZINGLY well shooting narrow-latitude color reversal (color transparency) movie film. It was a work of genius!

There have also been ways to determine exposure by chart wayyyyyyyyyyback in the olden days of photography, by using the lens itself, and stopping down the lens while viewing the image on the groundglass, and noting at what f/stop "the shadows disappear".

As far as the exposure latitude of B&W films, there was an old,old joke: "What't the right exposure for Tri-X?" Answer: "f/5.6 at one two-fiftieth." Follow-up: "Under what lighting"?
Answer: "anytime from from breakfast to supper".

 

[unpopular]

As far as the exposure latitude of B&W films, there was an old,old joke: "What't the right exposure for Tri-X?" Answer: "f/5.6 at one two-fiftieth." Follow-up: "Under what lighting"?
Answer: "anytime from from breakfast to supper".

LMAO. That's awesome.

 

[DiskoJoe]

I started out letting the camera choose my settings. Now I choose all my own settings on manual. What are your thoughts on automatic vs. manual. Do you always shoot one or the other or do you mix it up? If you shoot manual, what method do you use to remember settings for different situations?

Know your light source and you will know photography.

 

[DiskoJoe]

U know, its not really manual if your camera has a light meter. U should try guessing exposure without looking at the meter, it makes u think and slow down, both good things.

A long time ago , 40 years or more, we would practice learning to "read" the light without the use of the meter.

We would look at a scene, subject, what ever, announce what we would use and then check that against our meters. I had a friend to could "guess" down to 1/4 of a stop. Basically we started with what is known as the sunny 16 rule.

In fact for years, Kodak had recommendations posted on their film boxes about what numbers to use in varies lighting conditions.

Before that the directions were, sun behind the left shoulder, point and shoot, these box cameras were using around 1/125 @ f16. Lots of wonderful photos made that way.

Frankly I don't think it is guessing as it is training our brains . A lot of the old masters never used a light meter, they didn't exist but they managed ! .

Ann, call it what you want, but it's guessing. You learned to guess when there weren't light meters, you came close, and you also blew a lot of shots. Also back in the good old days, we did a lot of correcting from miss guessing in the darkroom while printing our pictures.

A light meter is just a tool. Tools help you get the job done more efficiency, more quickly, and with repeatable results.

This is the same type of conversation one would have talking about why have a automatic transmission. we learned on a manual trany, or why have power steering, you loose the feel of the road. etc.

Some of the best lessons in life are learned by taking a chance and making a mistake.

 

[table1349]

The old Kodak professional photo guide was a great tool and chocked full of every disk turn calculator there was. It actually still is an invaluable tool. Just don't see many people using them these days.

 

[unpopular]

It's the unabridged version of Understanding Exposure:

 

[jesse101]

The mode dosn't matter one bit - what matters is that you get the settings best for the situation you're shooting in for the creative result you want based on the lighting present (both natural and any added light such as flash or even reflectors).

f4, ISO 200, 1/250sec will give you the same photo no matter what shooting mode you use from full auto to full manual.

However what is important is getting those settings you want in the situation. When you start out this can often be a maze since you've still got to build up the experience of shooting in different conditions, with different subjects and lighting to learn what is going to be and what is not possible in certain situations; as well as what your creative side wants to make.


Also a lot of people say they shoot in one mode all the time, but even then it can depend. From my own experiences:
1) if I'm shooting flash dominated situations (that is where I'm adding the majority of light for the exposure with flash lighting) then I'll shoot in full manual mode. This is because I want a certain creative result and I've set the lights to achive that, but the camera meter can't read the flash light (its not there to be read till the flashes fire). So I've got to take over part of the metering process*


Whilst if I'm shooting general outdoor or wildlife I'll be in aperture priority mode. I want to set the aperture based on the sharpness and depth of field I want in the final shot; I also want to control the ISO (the noise level) in the photo. The rest of the time the shutter speed is being set by the camera, its already doing the metering that I'm basing my shutter speed off so might as well let it set that final setting since its going to be much faster at changing it for any lighting shifts than I ever will.
Note of course that I've still got control; I've still got to check that shutter speed; make sure its fast enough and if its not adjust the two settings I do control to get that shutter speed fast enough

Then if I'm shooting aircraft with propeller blades or panning a shot then I'll be in shutter priority. Here the creative part I want control over is the shutter speed, so that I can get a slow enough speed so that the rotor blades will blur - aperture (depth of field) takes second place and then you have ISO - so I control the ISO and let the camera balance the aperture based on the lighting.


Against all that you've also go to learn to understand when the meter will be tricked/fooled by the lighting. A good example is if shooting a very snowy scene when the camera will try to expose it all as grey; when you know that the scene is brighter. You can balance against this using manual mode or you've also got your exposure compensation in the two semi-auto modes.




All that sounds really complicated I'll bet - but in general its simple principles; the trick is practice. Lots and lots of it combined with lots of experiments. Mess around with the settings and try out different things to see what effects and results you get. Most good photography books (either film or digital) will also go into learning how to control your camera.
Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson is an often recommended beginner book on learning exposures and giving some creative ideas.




In the very end my view still stands that the mode itself does not matter - but that the photographer has learnt to control the camera first. Learn to use the semi-auto and the full manual modes fully. You can then make the choice upon which to use upon personal preference, style and what will get you the best result you want in the specific situations.


* - note in an ideal world with a more static/slow scene you'd use an external flash meter to help set the lighting values for the flash units.

Agreed! I personally shoot Manual mode most of the time, especially when i have time to shoot the subject.