Hi--
>Well, it looks like we basically agree.
I thought so, so was surprised by your introduction....;-)
>I jumped into the thread late and didn't catch your plea for accurate meters.
>Well I very strongly believe in accurate meters, too.
W/O which, all is chaos! ;-)
>As for the amount of bracketing, the fact that my bracketing spans
>1 1/3 stops does not imply that I feel my meter is inaccurate. Sometimes
>I just don't know exactly where I want to place the subjects in a picture
>on the film's scale. That's because, as you know, there is no one right
>exposure because it is subjective to a degree.
Hmmm...., actually, most of the time there is only one exposure that
looks right, which is the "right" one....;-)
It has always amazed me that something so obvious as fudging focus toward
infinity to make sure that it is sharp while trying to maximize DOF is
usually overlooked in discussions of DOF - I consider it rather basic.
Also it dawned on me that one difference in our techniques may account for
the bracket/no-bracket difference: if I go to the trouble of setting up a
tripod (most of my work is hand-held), insecurity about exposure sets in
(and it is harder with an in-camera meter to get a good exposure reading,
since the camera is planted), and I, too, bracket in 2/3rd stops.
>Yes, I occasionally wonder, what would an exposure between two 2/3
>stop brackets look like, and would it possibly look better than what I
>have? Well, I just have to live with that uncertainty, as neither do
>I want to decrease my bracketing to -1/3, 0, +1/3, nor do I want
>to spend the film for a five step -2/3, -1/3, 0, +1/3, +2/3 series.
Try a 1/4 stop sequence once, then imagine all your slides with a
1/4 stop bias - you will see my point: 1/4 stop over a bunch of slides
is obvious. (Same applies to audio, and 1/8 DB over a wide range....)
>On the other hand, do you never ever wonder, gee, what would this slide
>look like if it were half a stop brighter?
No, I try to hit it right the first time, and for me, 1/2 stop is a gross
error (quite obviously wrong, though possibly still useable, if necessary).
>Seems both of us have found a way to get consistently good exposures.
>But why don't you just try bracketing once in a while, If you don't,
>you have only one best exposure, and it may not be the best :)
>Frank
It is often enough that I save 2/3rds of my film costs. I tend to "bracket"
for sharpness, expression, and composition instead, though.
David Ruether