If a light meter is good enough for Deakins...

starcentral

starcentral

Veteran
Ok ok, the article is unrelated and has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not to use a light meter but ok, let's get into it here in the early New Year of 2014:

Who is using a light meter to either get an exposure where they want it on the curve, or using it to manage ratios, or throwing one out the window all together?

http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononhollywood/roger-deakins-prisoners-interview
680x478



Cheers,
 
Pointless 1980s tech. Shooting I use the onboard tools. Pre lighting I'd use my Nikon d80

Shooting Kodachrome and strobe I needed a light meter - it's now in the attic
 
I use mine to pre-light and check ratios when I want more precision than I get from my false colour metering. And also when I'm adjusting lights on set and don't want to have to run back to the monitor to re-check where things sit - but in the grand scheme of things, it certainly comes out far less often than it used to.

Eventually I'm sure I'll have a little pocketable monitor that works wirelessly, and will allow me to see what the camera is seeing whilst walking around the set and adjusting lights, and the day that happens, I'll instantly become an extra 5% faster at my job - and THAT I'm looking forward too immensely.
 
I use it all the time when I was a gaffer. And when I DP I still use it with my color meter, regardless of how many "cool" on board tools are on my monitor blocking my image. When I'm on set with a new Gaffer, if he doesn't have a light meter, then to me he doesn't understand light and know how to think for himself as a gaffer and artist. Basically a glorified electric, and I usually ignore any lighting suggestions from him. But then again, I'll first ask, "you like smoke, high contrast, not afraid to blow out a high light or let something go dark?" If they don't say yes, yes and I'm not afraid, then we have 2 complete different styles in lighting. A light meter is still a very important tool, maybe not the dp anymore, but the gaffer defiantly. When you have a gaffer you can trust, and they know how to use their light meter, you can prelight a whole scene without and camera and just walk in and shoot for them high pressure timely jobs.
 
A light meter is absolutely important. It tells you what the lights are doing, not what is reflected off the objects it so happens to hit. It is an absolute, and if you wish to work with any degree of precision and consistency then it is a must.

I've lit entire features to a T4 key, which meant that I had a consistency to my feeling of depth of field and a certain look. If I was shooting a given film stock or now a particular camera sensor, then I know that my key light should land at, say, 50 footcandles. Bingo, now I know how to scout my locations, preplan my lighting and put together an equipment order. I've had complicated sets pre-lit the day before, with no camera in sight. All that is needed is a light meter and someone who understands how and why it is useful. Then there are only minor tweaks on the day. To dismiss the use of the tool is foolhardy at best.
 
+1 Mitch. In camera tools are better than ever but they tell you what the camera sees not what the light is doing. I find an incident meter to be indispensable with any photographic system, film or digital. It measures the light directly. I profile all cameras to an incident meter to find true ISO reference for middle gray. It is the only way to get consistent control over scene values when the DR the camera sees from shot to shot may be quite different in the same scene.
 
I prefer a good waveform, but not all cameras have tools like that. In particular, you're asking for trouble if you shoot with a BMC without a meter.
(an external monitor could add these features, but it's more expensive; particularly because I expect to use my meter at least another 20 years, and I couldn't say the same about any monitor)
 
A lot depends on the type of work people are doing. If you are a single shooter or small crew shooting documentary style then there's not much need for a light meter and waveform/DSLR/iPhone will be more useful most of the time. But if you are working on larger sets with more intricate lighting then a light meter is a vital tool.
 
This thread comes up at an interesting time for me . I've been reading waveform monitors and vectorcopes for years. I worked managing head ends for cable companies years ago. So when I got going shooting, the waveform monitor has been my exposure tool because it is clear to me. Histograms not so much. I've experimented with false color but it's always felt fiddely switching around on set. This year I'm spending some time with them both.

I think it's time for me to get better with all exposure tools, including a light meter. I admit that the article on Inside Llewyn Davis in ASC is an inspiration. Also, I was on a shoot about a month ago as a third camera where the DP used a meter to set exposure going around to us all giving stops and isos. It was impressive, in this big space that he could get us all dialed in. Lastly, I acted on a big set in Oct/Nov and the gaffer and dp did everything with stops. The gaffer had a meter. No one ran behind camera to check exposures. The gaffer also had a "glass" ostensibly for aiming light but I don't know enough about that either.

I was acting in a 16mm B&W a couple of years ago and I thought it archaic how the DP calculated exposure but now I want to learn how to light and expose this way.

Why not?
 
hscully said:
The gaffer also had a "glass" ostensibly for aiming light but I don't know enough about that either.
Click to expand...
It's called a gaffer glass. Consider it a very strong ND (2.1) that you can put up to your eye and see the globe (bulb) of the unit while it's on to pin point the angle of the center of the beam. It's also great for gauging how fast clouds move over the sun. A gaffer needs to be able to tell the DP how much sun time they have and how much cloud time. It will pretty much decide wheather to wait a minute or rethink the lighting of that scene.
 
I think each tool has it's place.

For example… when scouting or checking out a location already booked by a client for a shoot, I have a color temp meter and light meter on my belt. Many times we are shooting commercials at different businesses, and I can do a quick walkthrough ahead of time so I know existing light intensity and color temp.
 
Yeah, here's another old guy who clearly is a hack, having to resort to a lightmeter...

ac0114_ILD_19.jpg


Bruno Delbonnel ASC -- from 2014 January American Cinematographer article "Inside Llewyn Davis"(2013)...
 
Liam Hall said:
A lot depends on the type of work people are doing. If you are a single shooter or small crew shooting documentary style then there's not much need for a light meter and waveform/DSLR/iPhone will be more useful most of the time. But if you are working on larger sets with more intricate lighting then a light meter is a vital tool.
Click to expand...

I've done a lot of solo event shooting. Walk the room with an incident meter to get key and ambient shadow readings. Pick a single center exposure, +/- 2 EV range, set aperture by eye based on visual judgment of shot values and in camera exposure check. Very fast and efficient unless camera settings are not easily accessible via manual controls.
 
The times I use a light meter these days have been whittled down to a) checking key levels on prelights, b) recording values in case we have to return to a setup later on (shooting green screen elements etc). For daily shooting on set, my Spectra comes out so rarely that someone inevitably jokes "whoa, what's that thing?" (I think my spot meter may be broken--haven't turned it in a very long time). For every DP that works the same way as they did in the film days there are probably 10 others who have largely put away their meters as we have pushed into the digital age.

Even when I was shooting film, I generally just metered keys for exposure and lit the rest to eye. Calculating ratios mathematically for me never made a lot of sense because it was always dependent on the subject being lit, on their skin tone and quality.

For those still developing their eye, it may be useful but the same can be said for learning to read scopes. Yes, they are all tools. Speaking of tools, I'm sure there are those out there who meter because they think it makes them look cool on set, akin to directors dangling MKV's around their necks. Whatever gets you the next job, I guess.
 
Razz16mm said:
I've done a lot of solo event shooting. Walk the room with an incident meter to get key and ambient shadow readings. Pick a single center exposure, +/- 2 EV range, set aperture by eye based on visual judgment of shot values and in camera exposure check. Very fast and efficient unless camera settings are not easily accessible via manual controls.
Click to expand...

Yes, fair enough, though I'd guess 90% of people shooting events who do have a light meter, don't have it calibrated to their camera or know the T-stop of their lenses.

CharlesPapert said:
I'm sure there are those out there who meter because they think it makes them look cool on set, akin to directors dangling MKV's around their necks.
Click to expand...
I sometimes get the meter out and wave it around to make an interviewee feel "special" - works well with models and music divas and always gives the crew a giggle.
 
I started shooting film and a light meter gives me a familiar reference for lighting. One of the most useful things I did with mine was to set up my lights and take incident meter readings at five foot intervals out to fifty feet. I put this info onto spreadsheets and I now have personalized photometrics for all of my lights. This makes pre-planning lighting set ups easier. It is also a useful learning exercise and I recommend doing it.
 
That's an interesting exercise David. Real life, I would think that with so many possible factors such as adding diffusion or color, gobos, spot or flood adjustment (where applicable)--I can't quite imagine using that information other than in as a relative reference of which light is punchier than another. It is good to have a knowledge that a 750 tungsten medium par delivers the same punch at 15 feet as a 2K fresnel or 1K open face (placeholder example, may not be accurate).

There are many ways to approach what is ultimately one of the most creative processes in the business. The mathematical end of it is an important asset to have when you need it. Like many other disciplines, the more you do it, the more instinctive it becomes. The most helpful rule of thumb I know is that if you think a unit will deliver just the right amount of light, bump up to the next biggest one. Much better to add a scrim and have some wiggle room than to be squeaking every last drop of level out of a head (moving it closer etc).

Regarding color temp meters...not quite as helpful as they once were, as they have a tough time with LED's, plus the correction table is no longer applicable as digital cameras are (thankfully) much more forgiving in the green-magenta axis.
 
Well, I did measure my lights using different configurations, especially set up as bounce sources and through the diffusion set ups that I had at the time. As a bottom feeder low budget guy I have a pretty unconventional array of fixtures and bulbs and testing them all like I did really solidified in my mind what I could do with the lights I have. One thing I did learn is that the "Equivalent light output" claims of the CFL manufactures can be used to fertilize gardens! You know... just sayin' !! Also, I picked up a case of new old stock 375 watt R-30 reflector photofloods, real cheap, and those lights are dang near as "Punchy" as a 750 watt Fresnel on all but full flood. Very interesting little bulbs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top