Wednesday, 8 May 2013

Meter this.

We’ve all seen the portrait photographer holding a white-domed object next to the subject’s face to take a light reading. So why is that being done? Why not just let the camera do its automatic exposure thing and take the picture?


It’s a good question in this digital age, where we can instantly review our shots to see if we need to re-shoot with a little exposure compensation. After all, the histogram in the camera tells us just about everything we need to know about the exposure in the shot – is it under- or over-exposed and is the exposure evenly distributed over the entire tonal range?

The short answer is that the handheld meter is mostly used to measure the light falling on the subject from studio strobes or flashes mounted off-camera.  In this scenario, the camera doesn’t typically have the ability to control the flash output, as it does in ETTL mode when the flash is mounted on the camera’s hot shoe.  Hence, studio photographers usually work with the camera in manual exposure mode, where they manually set the shutter speed to a value that will synchronize with the flash and the aperture to a value that gives the correct exposure. Alternatively, they can use the  meter reading to set the brightness of each flash in a multi-light setup to give a particular effect while ensuring a proper exposure.

Here, I’ve used the words ‘light falling on the subject’, meaning incident light. Hence, the incident light handheld meter measures the ambient light and ignores how much light the subject is likely to reflect.  The metering system in our camera, on the other hand, does rely on the light reflected from the subject to determine exposure.

Which is more accurate? The incident meter is, because it is calibrated so that it will give camera settings to make an 18% grey card look like 18% grey (middle mark on the histogram) when photographed.  The reflected meter, however, relies on the subject's tone averaging out to 18% grey in order for the exposure to be accurate. If the subject is overly dark or bright (such as a snow scene), the reflected meter gets fooled because it tells the camera to expose as if the subject is mid-grey. The incident meter would read the light falling on the snow rather than the light reflected from it, thereby resulting in the snow looking like bright white snow rather than grey slush.

I started out stating that the incident meter is used in the studio to measure the light from strobes or flashes, but obviously it has a function in outdoor ambient (continuous) light photography as well. Some photographers work in manual exposure mode all the time and therefore rely on an incident meter for camera settings.

So why bother? Part of the answer may be a throwback to the film days, where you never knew until it was developed whether you got the exposure right or not. An incident meter (and a little exposure  bracketing) gave you the confidence that you got the shot. That way of working may still influence the photographer who has made the transition to digital, partly because it’s good practice.

The bottom line, though, is that anyone seriously considering turning pro using studio lighting setups should consider working with a combination flash/continuous incident meter, if for no other reason than to save time. The alternative is to shoot, tweak, shoot and then tweak some more.

Combination meters can be a bit of an investment, so they’re not for everyone.  If you’ve got the spare change, though, a meter can help you understand the exposure mystery a little better and hit the bullseye every time.