For me, matrix metering is a black box. Matrix metering meters the whole frame in different sections and compares it to a pre-determined set of scenes. The computer in the camera then makes it's best guess as to what is actually being photographed and adjusts the exposure accordingly.
For example, the scene has a big bright spot in the middle and everything else is dark. For the sake of discussion, let's assume that the background and the bright thing differ by 4 zones. The camera might guess that you are doing a portrait on a black background, it also assumes that a face is supposed to be in zone VI, so it returns an exposure that would put the bright area in zone VI instead of the normal zone V and gives you the exposure. All is good. The face is not gray, as it would be if you used the other "dumb" metering modes and the background is black at a nice zone II, hiding any creases and patterns that you might have in the black background cloth.
But what if I am actually photographing a lamp with a lamp shade against a wall and I would love to see the intricate pattern on the wall paper? The camera would still put the lampshade in zone VI and letting the wall fall into zone II. I would get a black wall with only minute details of the wallpaper design. Not what I wanted. It would be better to sacrifice some detail in the lampshade and get the details of the wall instead. So I would place the wall in zone IV and the lamp would fall into zone VIII. That gives me the shadow detail of the wall at the expense of loosing detail in the lamp shade.
The biggest problem of matrix metering is that you never know what zone it placed the subject in and most of the time you don't even know what part of the scene the camera thought was the subject.
I'll put this example here to get ahead of myself and bring everything together, i.e. how the inherent limitations of digital manipulation would affect exposure decisions. Consider the case where I wanted detail both in the lampshade the wall, I would instead place the wall in zone III letting the lamp shade fall into zone VII knowing that I have a better chance of getting usable detail by adding digital light to the zone III part than pulling the highlights of the zone VIII part which usually gives grays instead of the real colours of the lampshade.
Showing posts with label metering systems. Show all posts
Showing posts with label metering systems. Show all posts
Thursday, 7 May 2009
Exposure, Part III - Light meters and placing the world into zones
All camera metering systems are reflective metering systems as opposed to incident metering systems, which because of their limited use, I will not talk about here in detail. I always meter with the spot meter in my camera which figures out the exposure from the amount of light in the central 5% of the frame. If your camera doesn't have such a function, you can fake it by zooming in on various parts of the image before metering. This turns your fancy matrix metering or center weighted metering into what is effectively a spot meter.
Before you do anything. Change the metering mode to spot, at least center-weighted if possible. What follows will not work with "intelligent" metering modes such as matrix metering. More on why matrix metering makes poor photos later.
First, how does the light meter determine the exposure? The meter determines the exposure necessary to render the area that is metered into a middle gray [zone V] in the final image. For digital cameras outputting JPEGs directly, one could argue that the meter knows exactly what amount of light will give a middle gray in the image because the same camera firmware that determines the exposure processes the data from the sensor into the image. If you calibrate your monitor right, it would show up as middle grey too.
Whenever you meter off some part of the scene and expose the photo according to the exposure values given by the metering system for that part of the scene, we say that you place that part of the scene in zone V. Since each photo has only one exposure , the other parts of the scene that are brighter or darker automatically fall into the other zones [yes, I do HDR too and I add digital lighting but we are talking about JPEGs straight out of the camera for now]. Without post-processing, there is nothing you can do about it, if part A and part B of the scene differ by 3 zones, they will always differ by three zones no matter what zone you place part A in.
All is nice and good if you put a card with a value of middle gray in every shot, meter from that and then remove the card to shoot the picture. This essentially turns the reflective metering system to a incident metering system because you are controlling the reflectivity of the surface on which you meter. But this is not what we usually do and most of the time, it is simply not possible. Imagine draping a large square of middle gray cloth on a distant mountain and metering off that then packing it up just before the exposure.
All still is nice and good if you photograph scenes that have elements that are middle gray or average to a middle gray [the classic example being a Dalmatian], sadly, that's often not possible either. Consider my nine shots of a white wall in part IIb. The meter reading places it in zone V so it turns out to be a perfect shade of middle gray, smack in the middle of pure white and pure black [joys of the linearity of digital images]. The meter is doing a wonderful job, but it has one critical flaw, it has no way of knowing that I want my white wall to be white. If I want the wall to be white, it had better be in zone VIII [or more], so you will have to increase the exposure by 3 stops based on the meter reading. In M mode, you would dial in your required exposure and in shutter/aperture priority modes you would set the +/-EV to +3EV to get the same results. In that way, you have just placed the wall in zone VIII.
Photos rarely have only 1 zone. Those that do are probably not very interesting either. When it comes to the real world, scenes will most often have more than 9 zones of dynamic range. Even with the much greater dynamic range of our eyes, we still cannot encompass the full range of light we encounter. The most common example is that a flash light in a dark room makes you loose you night vision, everything around the flashlight goes black, you are out of dynamic range. Our brains are hard wired to do everything to attenuate the brightest spot in the scene to our comfort level, be it grabbing sunglasses [use an ND filter when f/22 is still too bright], squinting, pupil contraction [decrease the aperture] or simply a matter of shifting perception [think of your eyes changing ISO]. Better safe than sorry. Working with the much smaller dynamic range of the camera, the photographer will need to decide what goes black and what goes white, to sacrifice some detail so as to preserve the moment. That, is the art of the exposure.
Before you do anything. Change the metering mode to spot, at least center-weighted if possible. What follows will not work with "intelligent" metering modes such as matrix metering. More on why matrix metering makes poor photos later.
First, how does the light meter determine the exposure? The meter determines the exposure necessary to render the area that is metered into a middle gray [zone V] in the final image. For digital cameras outputting JPEGs directly, one could argue that the meter knows exactly what amount of light will give a middle gray in the image because the same camera firmware that determines the exposure processes the data from the sensor into the image. If you calibrate your monitor right, it would show up as middle grey too.
Whenever you meter off some part of the scene and expose the photo according to the exposure values given by the metering system for that part of the scene, we say that you place that part of the scene in zone V. Since each photo has only one exposure , the other parts of the scene that are brighter or darker automatically fall into the other zones [yes, I do HDR too and I add digital lighting but we are talking about JPEGs straight out of the camera for now]. Without post-processing, there is nothing you can do about it, if part A and part B of the scene differ by 3 zones, they will always differ by three zones no matter what zone you place part A in.
All is nice and good if you put a card with a value of middle gray in every shot, meter from that and then remove the card to shoot the picture. This essentially turns the reflective metering system to a incident metering system because you are controlling the reflectivity of the surface on which you meter. But this is not what we usually do and most of the time, it is simply not possible. Imagine draping a large square of middle gray cloth on a distant mountain and metering off that then packing it up just before the exposure.
All still is nice and good if you photograph scenes that have elements that are middle gray or average to a middle gray [the classic example being a Dalmatian], sadly, that's often not possible either. Consider my nine shots of a white wall in part IIb. The meter reading places it in zone V so it turns out to be a perfect shade of middle gray, smack in the middle of pure white and pure black [joys of the linearity of digital images]. The meter is doing a wonderful job, but it has one critical flaw, it has no way of knowing that I want my white wall to be white. If I want the wall to be white, it had better be in zone VIII [or more], so you will have to increase the exposure by 3 stops based on the meter reading. In M mode, you would dial in your required exposure and in shutter/aperture priority modes you would set the +/-EV to +3EV to get the same results. In that way, you have just placed the wall in zone VIII.
Photos rarely have only 1 zone. Those that do are probably not very interesting either. When it comes to the real world, scenes will most often have more than 9 zones of dynamic range. Even with the much greater dynamic range of our eyes, we still cannot encompass the full range of light we encounter. The most common example is that a flash light in a dark room makes you loose you night vision, everything around the flashlight goes black, you are out of dynamic range. Our brains are hard wired to do everything to attenuate the brightest spot in the scene to our comfort level, be it grabbing sunglasses [use an ND filter when f/22 is still too bright], squinting, pupil contraction [decrease the aperture] or simply a matter of shifting perception [think of your eyes changing ISO]. Better safe than sorry. Working with the much smaller dynamic range of the camera, the photographer will need to decide what goes black and what goes white, to sacrifice some detail so as to preserve the moment. That, is the art of the exposure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)