exposure in the mountains

[Olivier Egli]

alright, you people might already know about my shoot...

 

I just went up to do some metering, and here is what I came up with, I used 200ASA with 1/3 Stop exposure compensation of a 81EF which is 120ASA, 1/50s exposure:

 

10:30 AM incidental reading 1,25M fc, gave me a F11

reflective reading on the snow gave me a F45 (18%grey) or F11 (as highlight)

as I want to shoot at F5.6 this means I have to bring the exposure down 3 stops

so with a ND.9

 

5:30 PM incidental reading 320 fc, gave me F5.6

reflective reading on the snow gave me F11 (18% grey) or F4.5 something

as I still want to shoot at F5.6 this means that I do not need to compensate

anymore at that time of the day. As I also probably take off the 81EF the exposure

should still be fine.

 

I used my sekonic studio delixe and the minolta spotmeter F

 

Any thoughts?

[Michael Nash]

I just went up to do some metering, and here is what I came up with, I used 200ASA with 1/3 Stop exposure compensation of a 81EF which is 120ASA, 1/50s exposure:

 

Any thoughts?

Yeah -- what 200 ASA stock are you exposing in sunlight with an 81EF filter, but no 85? If I recall from your posts, you've been trying to warm up the image beyond a normal balance. The only 200 ASA stocks I know of are tungsten balanced, so you'd need an 85 filter PLUS whatever warming filter you want. With only an 81EF you'd end up with an image that's bluer than normal.

 

Also, 1/3 stop compensation from 200 would be 160, not 120 (125). 120 would be 2/3 compensation.

[David Mullen ASC]

No, he originally said he wanted a cold bluish tone BUT he wanted the orange shirt of the actor to pop.

[Olivier Egli]

Haha, yeah, i know, I tend to confuse people with all my posts...

 

David Mullen is right, I want the image to be cold and the orange blouse to pop out.

any thought about my readings?

 

cheers

[Olivier Egli]

I just went up to do some metering, and here is what I came up with, I used 200ASA with 1/3 Stop exposure compensation of a 81EF which is 120ASA, 1/50s exposure:

 

Any thoughts?

Yeah -- what 200 ASA stock are you exposing in sunlight with an 81EF filter, but no 85? If I recall from your posts, you've been trying to warm up the image beyond a normal balance. The only 200 ASA stocks I know of are tungsten balanced, so you'd need an 85 filter PLUS whatever warming filter you want. With only an 81EF you'd end up with an image that's bluer than normal.

 

Also, 1/3 stop compensation from 200 would be 160, not 120 (125). 120 would be 2/3 compensation.

Ah, yeah, of course I used 160ASA, I confused it with the 2/3 stop compensation of the 85...

[Michael Nash]

Well, since I obviously lost some of the particulars of your shoot, maybe you can refresh my memory. ;)

 

Why do you want to shoot with 200 ASA film outdoors if your target f-stop is a 5.6? Are you planning on also shooting in deep shade or in overcast weather? Also, is this project for telecine or print? (Sorry to ask questions that you've probably already gone over).

 

The only thing that strikes me about all this is that I think you're worrying too much about getting a proper exposure for the snow. Simply expose for the incident light, and let the snow do what it does. If you're really worried about the snow clipping in bright sunlight, take a spot reading and see that it's not more than about 4 stops above your exposure. The odd spectral reflection will make the snow appear to glisten a little anyway, as long as it's not burning out completely. If you end up shooting in shade or backlit with sunlit snow in the background, then try to add more fill light to get your expsoure up closer to the reflected highlights.

 

It sounds more like you should shoot some tests to find the latitude and dynamic range of the film you're planning to use.

 

Bright sunlight typically calls for a slow ASA stock and ND filters. If you use film stock that's too fast, you end up using such a heavy amount of ND on the lens that you can't see through the viewfinder very well. And as someone pointed out recently, that becomes uncomfortable to switch between normal viewing and operating. Some cameras can take behind-the-lens filtration for this purpose, but not all.

 

Remember the "sunny 16" rule -- A normal exposure for sunlight is: film speed over shutter speed = f16. In other words 50 ASA and 1/50 shutterspeed gives you an f16. You can calculate different film speeds and shutter speeds from that. Naturally, as you expose more for shadow or in overcast light the f-stop will drop below a 16. All I'm saying is that you can predict which filters and film speed you'll need for bright sunlight as it's always the same, then have a plan for being able to get more exposure as you lose light or alter you filters, frame rates, and so on.

[Olivier Egli]

funny, I have never heard of this rule before. But it makes sense. Although my camera doesn not take different shutter angles and therefore I cannot change between different exposure times which makes it kinda obsolete...

 

I will follow the incidental readings but I want to have my spotmeter handy to be able to interpretate the readings according to what I want to be resolved and visible.

In the close ups I dont need to worry about anything but the skintones. I want them to look pale (make up and 81EF on 200T) and a bit underexposed... probably 1/3 of a stop under key.

 

but in the wide shots I need to watch out to hold some details in the snow. The landscape up there is not just flat, it has very much detail... But the detail is hidden in the snow.

I think the rule of thumb with the 4 stops over key is probably the best way to go. If I measure 3-4 stops over my actual iris setting then the snow will probably still hold detail.

But I though that in general you tend to close down in wide shots since wide shots give you a general feel of being brighter than close ups.

[David Mullen ASC]

> I think the rule of thumb with the 4 stops over key is probably the best way to go. If I measure 3-4 stops over my actual iris setting then the snow will probably still hold detail.

 

I assume you mean based on a spot meter reading off of the snow...

[Michael Nash]

But I though that in general you tend to close down in wide shots since wide shots give you a general feel of being brighter than close ups.

Where'd you get that idea? :P

 

I wouldn't agree with that at all. Exposure is exposure. It's only the content of the frame that might make the scene feel brighter or darker between wide or tight shots. Consider an alternate example: A night exterior with pools of light at key level, and lots of deep shadows and night sky (wide shot). Now cut to a closeup of someone standing in one of those pools of light, exposed at key level (same as the wide shot). Which shot will feel brighter? The wide frame full of shadow and black sky, or the closeup frame full of properly exposed skin tone? It's only the amount of bright or dark subject in the frame that makes shots feel brighter or darker with the same exposure.

 

So if your wide shots have lots of snow, it would naturally feel brighter overall than a closeup of skin tones at the same exposure. In that case you could justify closing down a little to maintain a more consistent luminence between shots. But don't think in terms of wide or tight -- think of the "real estate" in your frame. If it's MOSTLY snow, then expose more for the snow. If it's mostly face, expose for the face.

 

Where wide shots differ from closeups is the amount of DETAIL they reveal. For that reason it's not uncommon to use a lighter grade of lens diffusion on wide shots, and go heavier for closeups.

[Olivier Egli]

I agree, Michael.

When I said that wide shots tend to look "brighter" than close ups then I meant of course in a sequence of shots where you have the same objects in the frame like in my case:

you have the snow and the guy. So in close ups you expose more for the actor and in the wides you rather want to expose a bit more for the snow to keep some detail or it might burn out.

 

as I said I will try to expose for the skin tones in the close ups with the incidental readings and then bring the face down one stop (the bright make up used to make him look unnaturally pale and desoriented reflects probably more light than average caucasian skin). there I do not worry about the snow or sky burning out too much. of course I will still look if the snow burns out over 4 stops over key, which would be 5 stops over the skin...

 

in the wides I will take the incidental readings and bring it down a notch to be able hold the details in the snow as there is probably 90% snow in the frame.

 

but I am shooting all the way at F5.6 which will probably force me to use more NDs in the wide shots.

 

funny, I took readings at different locations in the alsp and at 5:30 pm everywhere the light was at key level giving me the exact foot candles for a ND-less exposure at F5.6

at 6 pm I wasnt able to use that iris anymore. it had gone far beyone F2.8

 

so, that's what I learnt from you guys...