"joe mama" wrote in message
...

"Daryl Bryant" wrote in message
LOL - how about spot metering!! How about if I use a set of studio
strobes
or say I want no shadows or double shadows or the list goes on and
on...!!


good god, you people don't even READ the damn post before spewing forth.

Once again..."any photographer that shoots more than one roll of film a
month (natural
light, not flash), or thirty digital "images" and still requires a meter
to
gauge exposure values is not only a hack, but lazy."

Why in the world would anyone want to guess when they have an absolutely
objective source - i.e., a light meter?

Like John Henry vs. the steam hammer isn't it? Just a little human hubris...

Funny, I guess all those pros that I work with are hacks, or are they just
lazy? No. To put bread on the table they need to Get The Shot. That is the
name of the game. Get The Shot. Anything that helps us to get the shot is
appreciated. Those guys would shake their heads in disbelief about your
little rant.

You obvioulsy don't shoot for a living.

Now I've been using S16 since the early 60s, and it has its place. It
especially had its place when meters were uncoupled, awkward and slow. But
with modern TTL, matrix metering anyone would have to be a fool not to use
metering.

I recently moved to digital (Nikon D200) and I am simply amazed at the
accuracy of the metering: it is spot-on 95% of the time. From sunny snow
scenes to 15 second night shots, the thing works superbly.

This kind of luddite rant reminds me of debate about autofocus in the 70s.
Ridiculous, they said, a gimmick, an insult to serious photography. Have a
good look at the difference between sports photography now and then. The
difference, in one word, is autofocus. It works. It beats manual focusing by
a country mile, in terms of speed. No it is not perfect - no tool is - but
it is extremely effective in a majority of situations.

So too with metering, only more so. The human visual apparatus is amazingly
accomodating. We can see quite well in a wide variety of lighting
situations. It is therefore entirely undependable for use as a measuring
tool. A meter is dumb and blind - no accomodation there. It simply,
accurately, reports what it "sees". Hook that up to a good algorithm which
controls the exposure of the camera and it simply cannot be beat in the
overwhelming majority of situations.

Toby