Does your camera lie to you?

[Terrill Hoffman]

A few of the threads lately have led me to ask this guestion.
Lets play a game! Most cameras in this day and time have built in light meters and most people depend on their cameras to set the exposure. Digital or film, it doesn't matter. In fact for this game you don't even have to have the camera loaded!
Go outside and lay a knife on a white sheet of paper. Right beside it lay a knife on a black sheet of paper. Now make sure that they are side by side and that the same amount of light is hitting both. Focus on one and then focus on the other.
Does the exposure reading in your camera change? (I know it will) Why? Which one is right?
Neither reading will be right! The meter in your camera is measuring the amount of light that is being reflected, not the amout of light that is there. All meters are set to an industry standard that measures in comparison of the light reflected off of 18% gray. (Yes, that is where that infamous "gray card" comes in.)
Since you are outside, at the same time and in the same light, we can said that the same amount of light is on both knives. It is the background of the white and black paper that is fooling the camera.
By the way, go get that $2 gray card, focus on it, get your reading and lock your camera on it. Then take the shots of the two knives on the different backgrounds and both will be exposed correctly. If you are using digital you should be able to see it. If you are using film, explain to your lab what you did. There machines are set up similar to your camera and like the camera, they will lie!
Why am I rambling on? Simple, it is my way of saying that yes, we all like having the latest and greastest in equipment. But it is the person that makes a good photograph.

[darrylburke]

Terril:

I like your idea.. and I have a question.. Assuming that I have a good laser printer, do you know of somwhere I can get a digital copy of the grey card to print off an use (the problem being have to run around to find a the card, rather then the $2 it's worth..)

I don't have any "real" camara shops near by..

[Terrill Hoffman]

A printed graycard could be close enough for "government work" but make sure it doesn't have a relective surface. It would be a bit easier just to order one. But the main jest of the post was to point out that too many people rely on what their camera is telling them. Then they always say, "I'll fix that in photoshop".

[floridafred]

While a gray card made for the purpose will give you the best results you can use a substitute. I use a file folder that is a gray color with descent results.

Also what I will do at times is to frame my object (which may be too light in color) and then pan to another object which is darker and the same distance away, depress the shutter to lock in the focus and exposure and then pan back to my object to take the picture. This of course is trial and error and not at all scientific. Also, if you ever saw any of my pictures you would realize you should not be taking any advice from me.

Anyway, I just got a new camera so maybe there will be buttons on the camera which will allow me to take better pictures. I'll be hanging out here to see what I can learn.

[Buddy Thomason]

Here's an Amazon.com link to an inexpensive photo-grey card:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...3045?vi=glance
A search on the web using anything close to "18% grey card" will yield a bunch of mail-order sources for anyone who's interested.

Terrill's post reminded me that I've become too dependent on advancing technology to correct or cover up a multitude of sins. Speaking for myself--it's pure laziness on my part--or rather resistance to really learning the "language" and key concepts in photography. For some of us it is like a "foreign language" and thus the knowledge doesn't come so easily.

As someone who's here to learn, I appreciate Terrill's reminder. I did exactly as he said, got the grey card, knife out in the sun on white, then black background, with and withought the card. The differences were dramatic. Returning to basics in this way also forced me back into my camera's owner's manual and I learned some stuff that I didn't catch in the beginning when I was in such a rush to let my new camera "make me a better photographer."

Regarding Photoshop and similar programs, I have come to realize, as proved by Terrill's experiment, that every time I let Photoshop take over I lose something from the original image, and often I have to settle for what Photoshop can do even when it's not exactly what I want. I need to improve that original image by learning and using more of the photographer's basic knowledge, then let a good camera and software enhance, not fix, the results. Thanks, Terrill!

[Chuck Burrows]

need to improve that original image by learning and using more of the photographer's basic knowledge, then let a good camera and software enhance, not fix, the results.

Buddy I couldn't agree more. With all humility I offer that my two photo contest winners (thanks guys) were exactly that - good camera shots with minimal enhancement.

Knife photographers - Terrill & Jim Weyer along with Ichiro Nagata (who takes those fantastic pics for Guns and American Handgunner Magazine) are my biggest influences (got to throw in Ansel Adams also) and the biggest thing I notice is that they all start out with GOOD photos with GOOD composition and then assumedly enhance where/when needed.

Terrill thanks for the gray card hint. Now I just have to figure how to lock the exposure . BTW i just took a hint from the thread on Point Seven's setup - using a mirror to bounce some light to eliminate shadows and it works!

[Terrill Hoffman]

Chuck, you're as bad as I am. I also saw the mirror and have been playing with it. Before I had been using tinfoil for the same purpose but a mirror cast a little more light.
Remember boys, photography as in knifemaking, if you see someone with a good idea, STEAL IT!

[Chuck Burrows]

Terrill-
I don't think of it as being bad - just smart. I really don't think that there is really all that much new under the sun-it's more like learning and adapting.

The mirror trick really does seem to work well - although the one I've been using is one of my wife's decorative ones and it isn't making her real happy guess I'll just have to go get one of my own. I was real surprised to find that the reflected light didn't seem to cause glare just took away some of those annoying shadows.

[SharpByCoop]

Thanks, Terrill, for an informative thread. I'm going to get myself a card as well to learn.

Buddy, you nailed it, with the other guys. The better the initial shot the easier it is. I have become a master at making good out of bad, and that ain't a bad thing, but not having to do so much work makes for a better shot overall.

Fred, I have been doing exactly what you described for quite some time. I set my light adjustment to a focal point crosshair, get the lightnes I need out of the darker area, then depress and lock it, and move off it to capture the image. It's a sneaky way around things, but it also works well. Don't move your distance because it also locks focus.

Where's my manual....

Coop

[Darrel Ralph]

IMHO When you start with a GOOD "REAL" natural picture you are on your way. Ps is a good tool to add a few things but making a good shot from a not so good shot is most often obvious if you know what your looking at.
The real deal is much harder to learn than PS.
It takes time and patients. Some give up to the computer.
I look at it this way. If you learn how to take good shots first just think of much less you have to do in the computer which is limited.

The ps look is ok but it gets to looking a the same after just a short time.

[whv]

good tips.
besides the gray card, i use an old trick called bracketing shots when i have the time: change the f/stop 1/2 up and down from the "correct" reading. this gives a really good chance of getting one 'better' shot out of the three. also, use the smallest f/stop-slowest shutter speed practical to increase the depth of field, making focus less critical especially at close distances.

[cwp]

Wayne,

This is a good idea, and on some of the new digitals there is a setting to do the bracketing for you. I think mine is either a 3 step bracket or a 5 step.

I started in a darkroom and moved to the computer. I still treat programs like PS as a darkroom, and do the same things that I did there. I know there are a bunch of other things I can do, they just don't ever seem to work well if the picture wasn't good to start.

--Carl