Metering off the Water/Sky?

When looking at Artie's details on his images, it seems when he goes manual
he's usually metering off the sky or water.

Is there a particular good/bad time to meter off one and not the other (assuming
both are present of course)?

Thanks
Doug

I don't use either sky or water because both may change. The sky may be bright blue, white, or various shades of gray. The water often reflects the sky and other surroundings. I usualy try to find something that is constant, doesn't change, and is always available. Then I meter on it in the same light as I expect the subject to be in. The closer the constant is to a middle gray, the better. In Florida I usualy use green vegetation. I use full frame evaluative metering and I meter on an area that does not contain large amounts of shadow or refective highlights. Once I have a meter reading I can adjust exposure on the fly for different subjects, and different lighting conditions. When the source lighting changes I will often re-meter the constant. Once you have metered the constant, all exposures may be derived by comparing the subject to the constant or the lighting conditions the constant was in. I hope this helps.

Thanks Doug for this interesting question and Jim for constructive reply. My concern is for images of birds on water on estuaries and lakes where unable to fill most of viewfinder with the bird, and no ground or tree areas etc catching the same light. Wonder whether bracketing exposures considered practical to cover the likes of white gulls and dark cormorants? Thanks: Ian Mc

If there are subjects present with white areas in their plumage you can use a series of test images varying the exposure and using the flashing highlight alert to determine the correct exposure for birds with white in the light conditions expected. Exposure for subjects with differing tonalities may be derived from the test exposure based on previous experience.

Thanks Jim I usually have associated flashing highlights with overexposed skies. Good to use this now for birds with areas of white. Cheers: Ian Mc

In lieu of an 18% gray card, meter off your open clean palm & open up 1 stop. This reading should equal the reading from an 18% gray card & be the same reading as an incident light meter.

Having just come back from shooting ducks on the east coast for a solid week, I grew accustomed to metering off of the water, adding one stop for birds with bright whites to protect (shovelers, for example) and adding two stops for mid-toned birds. This was a new method for me, but seemed to work pretty well. Yes, the light changes on the water, but it changes for the birds on the water too, and seems to be close. Sometimes you're in open water conditions and you don't really have anything else to meter off of too. I know other people have other techniques, but this got me really close if not right on every time...just my recent experience.

It is best to meter off an element of single tonality that fully encompasses the meter pattern in use in the same light as the subject. Water varies almost constantly in tonality and is not recommended.
Chas in Japan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Neiger

I don't use either sky or water because both may change. The sky may be bright blue, white, or various shades of gray. The water often reflects the sky and other surroundings. I usualy try to find something that is constant, doesn't change, and is always available. Then I meter on it in the same light as I expect the subject to be in. The closer the constant is to a middle gray, the better. In Florida I usualy use green vegetation. I use full frame evaluative metering and I meter on an area that does not contain large amounts of shadow or refective highlights. Once I have a meter reading I can adjust exposure on the fly for different subjects, and different lighting conditions. When the source lighting changes I will often re-meter the constant. Once you have metered the constant, all exposures may be derived by comparing the subject to the constant or the lighting conditions the constant was in. I hope this helps.

---

Why full frame evaluative instead of spot metering?

Jay,

It does not matter which pattern you use, as long as you can fill the pattern with similar tonal values. Jim is substitute metering, filling the Eval pattern with an average tone to get a baseline.

Chas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charles Glatzer

Jay,

It does not matter which pattern you use, as long as you can fill the pattern with similar tonal values. Jim is substitute metering, filling the Eval pattern with an average tone to get a baseline.

Chas

---

Understand; isn't it easier to fill a smaller pattern?

Yes

See you soon.

Chas in Japan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Gould

Why full frame evaluative instead of spot metering?

---

Jay,

As Chas said, as long as you can fill the pattern with the desired tonal value, it really doesn't matter. The reason I use full frame pattern is that the vegetation I'm usualy metering on contains small areas of shadow or highlight and I don't want to mistakenly hit one of these with a spot pattern or have a partial frame pattern be thrown off by an area of vastily different tonal value. By using full frame I can usualy let these small areas of different tonal values sort of average each other out giving the desired end result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Neiger

Jay,

As Chas said, as long as you can fill the pattern with the desired tonal value, it really doesn't matter. The reason I use full frame pattern is that the vegetation I'm usualy metering on contains small areas of shadow or highlight and I don't want to mistakenly hit one of these with a spot pattern or have a partial frame pattern be thrown off by an area of vastily different tonal value. By using full frame I can usualy let these small areas of different tonal values sort of average each other out giving the desired end result.

---

Jim,

I could not agree more, and exactly the same reason I will often go to Center-weighted or Eval.

Best Amigo,

Chas