Light Meter Use - a poll

[jgharding]

Simply put, I'm interested in the lighting and exposure practices of those using digital video cameras, specifically the use of seperate dedicated light metering.

 

If you could take a moment to answer my poll I'd be very grateful, I'm interested to see how those of differing age, generation, experience and practice work with metering, or if indeed they do at all.

 

I know some who swear by it, some who would never use it and some who change depending on shot and situation, so I'm interested to see the spread of opinion with the user base here on EOSHD

 

Many thanks,

 

JG

[Julian]

No, never. Why would you when you have a histogram?

[MOONGOAT]

I'm going to say most responses will be no because they're not professionals who need them.

[jgharding]

That's the debate I'm interested in! :)

[/p/]

I just use the live histogram.. 

[jgharding]

I do expect people to say no, but i'm interested in why so,

 

So why is it you would you say a professional would need one but most would not?

[MOONGOAT]

Because they're expensive, cumbersome and unnecessary to almost everyone but perfectionists and professionals.

[Julian]

So why is it you would you say a professional would need one but most would not?

 

Maybe those professionals are just old fashioned? :) or they are shooting film...

[MOONGOAT]

Generally Light Meters are used because misjudging an exposure on film would be very costly. When you're shooting with a bunch of friends or on a low budget set with a prosumer digital camera it's not such a big deal. No need to waste hours during a shoot checking those values. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but a lot of DP's don't use Light Meters because they aren't always necessary, especially when you know your camera well enough.

[richg101]

Having a little hand held meter which you can use to check every element in frame while the camera is locked down I imagine would be really nice.  I don't own a light meter but am planning a purchase for use in a film I am writing.  when using a camera with limited dynamic range that needs scenes lit properly I think it will be an invaluable addition when lighting a scene. 

[QuickHitRecord]

Funny to see this post as I placed an order for a Gossen Digisix 2 last week. Up until now I have only been using a waveform to monitor exposure, but the ability to light a scene before the camera even shows up is invaluable to me. Also, I can match contrast ratios for consistency across a project. I'm really looking forward to getting it.

[MOONGOAT]

That's a good point you raise. Being able to light a scene preemptively. If you're lighting within your cameras latitude however wouldn't the contrast ratios stay the same anyway? Or at least be very close.

[QuickHitRecord]

That's a good point you raise. Being able to light a scene preemptively. If you're lighting within your cameras latitude however wouldn't the contrast ratios stay the same anyway? Or at least be very close.

 

I am thinking more along the lines of key : fill : background exposure.

[andy lee]

My Sekonic 308 hardly gets used now - shot film for 20 years so it was essential

but seeing as you can now see the image you are shooting instantly its not used much now

I now work on the notion of

'if it looks good..it is good'

[richg101]

My Sekonic 308 hardly gets used now - shot film for 20 years so it was essential

but seeing as you can now see the image you are shooting instantly its not used much now

I now work on the notion of

'if it looks good..it is good'

 

very true.  once used to shooting on a flat profile and judging by what you see on the evf/monitor, if it looks good on the monitor/evf. when the contrast is brought back in post it always seems to work, 

[andy lee]

Ive just been using the new Cineroid Retina display EVF its absolutely stunning!!

highly recomended

 

EVF 4RVW

 

http://www.cineroid.com/

[OzNimbus]

I still take my Sekonic on every single shoot.  I don't use it as much anymore, but it's great to have around.

[jgharding]

That's a good point you raise. Being able to light a scene preemptively. If you're lighting within your cameras latitude however wouldn't the contrast ratios stay the same anyway? Or at least be very close.

 

Sometimes you'll have different types of camera, in this case something like the Sekonic 758, for example, allows you to store multiple dynamic range profiles for different cameras to ensure consistency.

 

The consensus seems to be that lighting before cameras arrive can be more easily achieved using a good light meter.

 

Also, in a situation where on-set monitoring is not of the highest quality, one might benefit from the second opinion of a light meter so as to be sure of no nasty surprises in post..

 

Though good WYSIWYG monitoring and the decent (if not always film-like) latitude of modern digital inspires us with a lot of confidence that things can be rescued in post, total consistency can be achieved by checking the light in reality, so to speak.

 

Thinking about it, metering is not so useful (in the rawest sense) with Red, Alexa or F65 as the latitude is enormous, and preview monitors using a higher contrast profile can be used to show a rough final result.

 

However, when recording to a lower dynamic range 4:2:0 8 bit profile, it's arguable that many would benefit from using such metering on set, it's often the case that protecting the highlights from digital clipping will crush the blacks, and It's probably easier to have a meter tell you the range of a scene and how much fill light is appropriate, than it is to guess with the WYSIWYG.

[Axel]

... a lot of DP's don't use Light Meters because they aren't always necessary, especially when you know your camera well enough.

 

I had a Bolex 16mm with spring mechanism, very dark reflex viewfinder and an additional parallax viewfinder (being just what the term implies, a viewfinder). You could use film with different speeds. Quite impossible. There was no actual WYSIWYG. Yet, it was a 'run&gun' camera, a reporter's camera. I had the background and experience to judge the exposure (which only meant the aperture, because shutter angle and Iso were fixed). It's not as hard as it sounds.

 

Today, with our digital cameras, the preview we get during recording may not be perfect, but compared to the guessing of those analog-mechanic times, it is close to perfect. Does the doctor still use the stethoscope when the patient is monitored by the computer already?

[galenb]

I have an old swivel head light meter and a hand grip type spot meter somewhere. I haven't needed to use them in some 13 years now. The only reason I ever had to in the first place was when doing 'stop math'. That's what I called it back then. You know, when you have a bunch of light on a set and you need to meter each one separate to figure out what light it throwing you over the top of whatever. You meter each one individually and add up the number using some equation I can't even remember and all that. But honestly, this was all because I was working on tiny little stop motion sets and shooting on film. Now a days I don't do that at all. I suppose if I was working on a set then yes, I would most likely need to pull one out now and then to check levels and what-not. But just going outside and shooting videos of my cats... not so much. ;-)