Profiling a Sekonic 758 DR

[Andrew Rodney]

Read this:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
http://www.digitalphotopro.com/technique/camera-technique/exposing-for-raw.html

Its not geek speak, its about optimal exposure for the median we're using (Raw digital Linear capture) and has nothing to do with film!

 

[John Prendergast]

Read this:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
http://www.digitalphotopro.com/technique/camera-technique/exposing-for-raw.html

Its not geek speak, its about optimal exposure for the median we're using (Raw digital Linear capture) and has nothing to do with film!

I hadnt read any of those before I shot this photograph below and there are many others that I think I have gotten by with, just relying on the fundamental principals of photography that I have been taught and have learned. I may take a look at that stuff sometime out of curiosity about what all the fuss is about if I ever find I have a gap in running a business and using photography to make my living at. As yet however, I have no need of it, my colours are fine and so are my prints.

I want to make the most of what this meter can do so I can attack more adventurous lighting set-ups, quickly, accurately and efficiently.

 

[Andrew Rodney]

I want to make the most of what this meter can do so I can attack more adventurous lighting set-ups, quickly, accurately and efficiently.

If you really want to retain the word accurately then you would be well served to understand the proper way to expose for Raw.

Or one could go back to the analog film days and suggest, why not under expose and push the film all the time? That works. Its not ideal nor as accurate. It might be fine, like your prints.

 

[John Prendergast]

With respect Andrew, I took a look at your website and the shots on it and I dont think you can tell me anything about how to shoot professional photography.

 

[Andrew Rodney]

With respect Andrew, I took a look at your website and the shots on it and I dont think you can tell me anything about how to shoot professional photography.

Ah, we're talking about the technical aspects of proper Raw exposure. Where you going with this? Its immaterial.

You can exposure your images any way you think is best (ignorance is bliss). If you're going to join a discussion about exposure and exposure meters and Raw data, you might want to read the links I provided assuming you don't want to sabotage the topic somewhere else concerning the esthetics of either the photograph above or the photography on my site.

 

[John Prendergast]

Ah, we're talking about the technical aspects of proper Raw exposure. Where you going with this? Its immaterial.

No! we're talking about trying to profile a Sekonic 758, just as the thread title, says. And as for joining the discussion, I created the discussion. You will find my name at the start of the topic., you joined it, took it off topic and hijacked it from the whole point, for the reason in my opinion that you wanted to drag it to your totally unconnected field of business, which I beleive is trying to sell Colour management expertise to photographers. If I ever have any need for it, if I cant find the answer on a PhaseOne forum, I'll let you know.

I know what to do with RAW files just fine, that is why I havent asked ANYTHING about them.

 

[Andrew Rodney]

No! we're talking about trying to profile a Sekonic 758, just as the thread title, says.

Profile it to WHAT?

That product's aim is to provide exposure values no? WTF are you exposing, film or digital? If digital (and you said that), you have two options, one is based on the linear response of the sensor. Going again back to the URL's you seem to think are too geeky or have no relationship to actual exposure.

 

[John Prendergast]

Profile it to WHAT?

To the Camera. That is what the software does (or is supposed to). I would have thought that was clear.

Lets make this easier.

I'm shooting jpgs! At least that will get rid of the RAW "distraction"

 

[Andrew Rodney]

Lets make this easier.

I'm shooting jpgs! At least that will get rid of the RAW "distraction"

Yes, it would be totally different. JPEGs are output referred, gamma corrected, baked pixels.

For the unsuccessful profiling, I have been shooting raw,

Gee, I wonder why?

 

[John Prendergast]

Yes, it would be totally different. JPEGs are output referred, gamma corrected, baked pixels.

Whatever!

Anyway, back to the original question.

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

With respect Andrew, I took a look at your website and the shots on it and I dont think you can tell me anything about how to shoot professional photography.

John,

We are having an open discussion here. Like all the others, the comments made here by Andrew are on-topic. If you do not agree with what he says, that's fine. But your post above crosses a line as you attack him personally. This is the kind of behaviour we normally do not have to deal with here in OPF so I am much bothered by it. Please keep your calm and professionalism at all times.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Cem,

It can also be seen the other way. John was open and said he couldn't learn from Andrew's photography. Both are correct but where they meet each goes past the other. To be practical, following Frank Doorhoff's pragmatic instructions for adjusting the meter to match the camera works. I've been to his workshop, seen him work, looked at the files and it's internally consistent. Just use the grey reference targets he suggests and it will all be fine. The reflectance has to be in the range he uses.

Likewise Andrew Rodney's grasp of the theoretics of light and the practical form for using this is solid. However, AFAIK, he does not regularly shoot weddings and have to get the nuances of the bright whites, sparkles of added beads and embroidery veil as well as the detail in the groom's black suit in the same picture. If Andrew had to deliver, for sure he would! Frank, however, does this sort of range of work all the time.

I do not find the differences in these worlds to be a serious issue. So please, let's not get worked up!

Asher

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Cem,

It can also be seen the other way. ..


I do not find the differences in these worlds to be a serious issue. So please, let's not get worked up!

Hi Asher,

No it can't be seen the other way. If I told you you cannot comment on my thread because your own photography sucks, wouldn't I be crossing a line? I wasn't the one who was getting worked up, BTW.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Guys,

In OPF we all show respect. Let's cool this for 48 hours. Please let this rest. I'm not closing the thread. Just on an honor system. We have to be respectful of each other. Of course we all have different motivations. That's understood. Still this is OPF and we keep respectful. I'll re read everything as see if it can be better sorted out.

Thanks for understanding, I've never requested this before. We go by consensus so I ask for your support on a voluntary basis. You can start a new thread with just a technical essence but not being personal in any way. This thread is tainted. In OPF we never can have a suggestion of disrespect. We may be able to mend it without censoring photographic content, but it's late so it's not today!

Asher