Hi Mike,
Welcome back. It's good to hear your point of view again.
I owned cameras long before I owned meters. A Mamiyaflex and a Nikon SP2
to be specific. I knew sunny 16 and where to go from there since I was ten or
twelve years old (used my dad's Argus), and I shot many rolls of good
exposures without a meter. And while we old men like to grumble about how we
don't need meters, we do. If we want to make perfect pictures, that is. As you
said in an earlier thread, one can correct for a bit too much contrast or a
bit too little with paper grades, but on my cold-light enlarger nothing yields
a print from a dead-on neg that prints to 8x10 at maybe 15 seconds on f11 with
a number 1 filter on multigrade or on number 2 paper. To get that, I have to
come within a 1/2 stop. That's tough in overcast or indoors without a meter.
Now, I know you're not suggesting that everyone toss their meter in the
trash. But I think we should keep some perspective on this. We agonize over
which paper or developr or film is best, then we say, "what the hell," let's
guesstimate the exposure.
Mike Johnston wrote:
> > You always have interesting perspectives and information to share. I
> > can appreciate your description of a "good" meter. Do you have any
> > more information on what models (mostly Pentax) might have either good
> > or bad meters.
>
> Bruce,
> Nope. Metering pretty much bores me. There was a time in my life when I was
> doing nothing but photographing, all day, every day, and I went six months
> without using a meter of any kind (yes, it's possible).
>
> --Mike
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
