Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
Thread started 13 Apr 2004 (Tuesday) 16:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Shooting on Bulb

 
velvetjones
Member
Avatar
153 posts
Joined Apr 2004
Location: Great American Desert
     
Apr 13, 2004 16:13 |  #1

One issue that I can't seem to figure out is how to properly expose shots on bulb setting...or longer than 30 seconds. Is there some sort of formula to use...will a light meter calculate that for me?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Apr 13, 2004 16:59 |  #2

Easiest way is to set the camera on manual and the aperture wide open, and see what the meter says. If necessary punch the ISO up too, until you get an exposure under 30 seconds. Then start adjusting back to the aperture and ISO you really want, doubling the time for every full stop.


So let's say you have to set the aperture to f/4 and ISO 400 to get a reading under 30 seconds - for simplicity we'll say that the camera picks exactly 30 seconds. But you really want f/11 for good depth of field and of course you want ISO 100.

f/4 to f/11 is 3 stops - to f/5.6, f/8, f/11. So you have to double 30 seconds 3 times - to 1 minute, 2 minutes, 4 minutes.

ISO 400 to 100 is 2 stops - to 200, 100. So we double 2 more times - to 8 minutes, 16 minutes.

So for for our example you'd set the camera for f/11, ISO 100 and an exposure of 16 minutes.

Since 16 minutes is a long time to wait I'd cut that in half - thus underexposing 1 full stop - and do a picture at 8 minutes and check the histogram. Judging the histogram will give you an idea for the next try. Sure, the 8-minute shot might be an extra, unnecessary step, but why wait 16 minutes to find out it's messed up? :)


Sure, a light meter would do this, too, but this way is quite a bit cheaper.


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottbergerphoto
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,429 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
     
Apr 13, 2004 18:05 |  #3

Nicely done! Good explanation!
Scott


One World, One Voice Against Terror,
Best Regards,
Scott
ScottBergerPhotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
velvetjones
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
153 posts
Joined Apr 2004
Location: Great American Desert
     
Apr 13, 2004 18:45 |  #4

Thanks for the great explanation...It seems pretty clear. However, I don't get what you mean by histogram...I don't have a digital if that has anything to do with it.

As far as the light meter goes, my friend has one and told me that it cannot meter for exposures longer than about a second...whatever that means. Are you saying that I could just buy a light meter and (taking a cityscape shot at night) simply hold it up to get a reading if I need a 2 or 3 min. shutter speed? I am thinking about getting one anyway, and I just wanted to confirm that it is in fact capable of doing that...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Apr 13, 2004 20:02 |  #5

velvetjones wrote:
Thanks for the great explanation...It seems pretty clear. However, I don't get what you mean by histogram...I don't have a digital if that has anything to do with it.

Ow! I feel ashamed for making the assumption. A histogram exists on many/most digital cameras, and it shows a graph of the exposure ranging from light to dark.

With film this does make it more difficult, but it's still possible exactly as explained above, but really requires bracketing. Film has a "problem" known as reciprocity failure, which basically means that long shutter times will cause film to begin to underexpose as the time increases. The above example shows a final exposure time of 16 minutes, but at that length of time film may underexpose by 1 or even 1-1/2 stops. So you have to adjust the shutter time and add another stop (at least) and go to 32 minutes.

Because reciprocity failure varies by film, experimentation is necessary, and thus bracketing is necessary until you get used to that film at long shutter times. Because it's so uncertain the above example would probably require at least 1 extra stop. I would then take at least one more picture at +1-1/2 stops, 48 minutes. Hopefully one of the two would come out correctly. Being paranoid I'd take 4 pictures - 24 , 32, 48, and 64 minutes.

There are links out there which should list reciprocity failure adjustments for the more popular films.

As far as the light meter goes, my friend has one and told me that it cannot meter for exposures longer than about a second...whatever that means. Are you saying that I could just buy a light meter and (taking a cityscape shot at night) simply hold it up to get a reading if I need a 2 or 3 min. shutter speed? I am thinking about getting one anyway, and I just wanted to confirm that it is in fact capable of doing that...

If the light meter maxes at 1 second then calculating a 3-minute exposure would be very difficult, if not impossible. But not all light meters max at 1 second. The Sekonic L-558 (external link) lists:

    Film speeds:
    ISO 3 to ISO 8000 (1/3 steps)

    Shutter speeds:
    Ambient: 30 minutes to 1/8000 second (full, 1/2 or 1/3 steps) Plus: 1/200, 1/400

    Flash:
    30 minutes to 1/1000 second (full, 1/2 or 1/3 steps) Plus: 1/75, 1/80, 1/90 1/100, 1/200, and 1/400


(Granted, that's a pretty darn fancy $640 light meter that does 1-degree spot and incident metering.) But that means that this particular meter can do what you want with no issues. And you *do* have a meter in your camera. Because of reciprocity failure it's going to take some experimentation anyway, so experiment a bit and see if it works before spending a few hundred bucks on a meter.

//Edit: Thinking about the various dark shadows and bright lights in a night cityscape, you're probably going to want a fairly tight spot meter to ensure that you don't blow out streetlights and lit windows. A 1- or 2-degree spot meter won't be cheap.

You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Apr 13, 2004 20:05 |  #6

scottbergerphoto wrote:
Nicely done! Good explanation!

Hush! Talk like that is going to ruin my reputation around here, and people might start thinking that I actually know something. :wink:

Thanks.


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
IndyJeff
Goldmember
Avatar
1,892 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Oct 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
     
Apr 13, 2004 21:05 |  #7

Scottes I am impressed. I would know how to do something like that but I don't know if I could explain it.

Do you know of the F16 rule?


On shooting sports...If you see it happen then you didn't get it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotosGuy
Cream of the Crop, R.I.P.
Avatar
75,941 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 2611
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Middle of Michigan
     
Apr 13, 2004 23:04 |  #8

Hey, Scottes! Great job!

Another thing to consider is what are you taking pics of? For instance, if I had to do a skyline of a city (using slide film) I'd shoot some 2-3 stops underexposed while there was still some light in the sky. Then I'd double expose over them with the actual night shot.

This could even be done with a Nikon by marking the film when I loaded it so that I could reload it later in the same 'registration'. If you try it, be sure that the tripod is firmly attached to something that won't move! It's wouldn't hurt to have an assistant there, too (bathroom breaks).
:)


FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
Classic Carz, Racing, Air Show, Flowers.
Find the light... A few Car Lighting Tips, and MOVE YOUR FEET!
Have you thought about making your own book? // Need an exposure crutch?
New Image Size Limits: Image must not exceed 1600 pixels on any side.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nosquare2003
Senior Member
861 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2003
Location: Hong Kong, China
     
Apr 14, 2004 00:18 |  #9

Scottes wrote:
Easiest way is to set the camera on manual and the aperture wide open, and see what the meter says. If necessary punch the ISO up too, until you get an exposure under 30 seconds. Then start adjusting back to the aperture and ISO you really want, doubling the time for every full stop.


So let's say you have to set the aperture to f/4 and ISO 400 to get a reading under 30 seconds - for simplicity we'll say that the camera picks exactly 30 seconds. But you really want f/11 for good depth of field and of course you want ISO 100.

f/4 to f/11 is 3 stops - to f/5.6, f/8, f/11. So you have to double 30 seconds 3 times - to 1 minute, 2 minutes, 4 minutes.

ISO 400 to 100 is 2 stops - to 200, 100. So we double 2 more times - to 8 minutes, 16 minutes.

So for for our example you'd set the camera for f/11, ISO 100 and an exposure of 16 minutes.

Since 16 minutes is a long time to wait I'd cut that in half - thus underexposing 1 full stop - and do a picture at 8 minutes and check the histogram. Judging the histogram will give you an idea for the next try. Sure, the 8-minute shot might be an extra, unnecessary step, but why wait 16 minutes to find out it's messed up? :)


Sure, a light meter would do this, too, but this way is quite a bit cheaper.

Scottes, you are starting a good reputation of knowing a lot. 8)

But if you want to judge the exposure only, could it be done by f/4, ISO400 for 30 seconds?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Apr 14, 2004 00:44 |  #10

nosquare2003 wrote:
Scottes, you are starting a good reputation of knowing a lot. 8)

Nooooooooooooooo!
:)

Next thing you know people aren't going to accept my bird identifications anymore and my "justabird" IDs are going to have to be replaced with real names.

But if you want to judge the exposure only, could it be done by f/4, ISO400 for 30 seconds?

Yep. It's the same exposure. Ignoring reciprocity failure - which is a huge thing to ignore for film at such long shutter times - f/4 ISO 400 for 30 sec would produce the exact same exposure as f/11, ISO 100 for 16 minutes.

If I were in this situation - having a digital camera with a histogram - I'd do f/4 ISO 1600 for 7.5 seconds - also the same exposure - and then check the histogram and LCD image. If it looked good THEN I'd kick back for 16 minutes. Patience is a virtue. I have no virtues.


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Apr 14, 2004 00:51 |  #11

IndyJeff wrote:
Do you know of the F16 rule?

Yep. Problem is that I am absolutely useless at judging light, so this is useless to me unless I'm out on a sunny cloudless day between 10 and 4.


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RichardtheSane
Goldmember
Avatar
3,011 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Nottingham UK
     
Apr 14, 2004 10:56 |  #12

Another thing to remember, on film, when doing exposures of more than a minute or so you have to take reciprocity faliure into account.
Basically the longer you expose film to light the less sensitive it becomes to light. So if you calculate your exposure to be 5 minutes, you will probably have to exposeit a bit longet that five minutes to get a balanced exposure.

Some fairly heavy reading bleow :)

http://home.earthlink.​net …technique/recip​rocity.htm (external link)

also google on reciprocity failure
:)


If in doubt, I shut up...

Gear: 40D, 12-24mm AT-X Pro, 17-85mm, Sigma 150mm Macro Sigma 100-300 F4, 550EX, other stuff that probably helps me on my way.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
velvetjones
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
153 posts
Joined Apr 2004
Location: Great American Desert
     
Apr 14, 2004 16:44 |  #13

Thanks for the great info...I really appreciate it. I am excited to try some of these out....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Apr 14, 2004 16:47 |  #14

Be sure to let us know how it worked out, and share if at all possible.

I'm kinda curious if I was correct about the above procedure since I've never tried it. :)


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,454 views & 0 likes for this thread, 7 members have posted to it.
Shooting on Bulb
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is AlainPre
1769 guests, 155 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.