# Metering mode swim meet



## TonyUSA (Jun 19, 2019)

Hello,

Been using Evaluative metering mode all the time for bright outdoor swim meet.  I was thinking to try spot metering. Which mode do you think is best? 

Thank you,


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

I think center-weighted average is good. Spot metering is fine for determining an exposure, but it is not that good when using automatic exposure  modes. When Shooting action photos it is important that the metering not be super-critical as to where the camera is pointed. When using Aperture value Automatic, I have found that evaluative metering is pretty good, as is Center weighted averaging metering.  Spot metering is extremely critical as to exactly what the camera is pointed at, making this a very limited use mode when the camera is set to automatic modes.

 My experience is that  spot metering is best for fully Manual exposure setting.
If you are using  Aperture value automatic, then I would not use  spot metering. Spot metering is best for carefully  determining the exposure and  then Setting that exposure, and sticking with it.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

Personally, I have had very few times when I felt that spot metering really gave me much of an advantage.  In most outdoor situations light levels don't change very much, and once you figure out the right exposure you are normally pretty good to go for an hour or so at a time.

 Truth be told, I have very little use for spot metering, and I feel that it leads to very inconsistent exposures unless it is used very carefully. Spot metering does not lend itself well to automatic exposure modes.


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 20, 2019)

Derrel said:


> Truth be told, I have very little use for spot metering, and I feel that it leads to very inconsistent exposures unless it is used very carefully. Spot metering does not lend itself well to automatic exposure modes.



As in all things it sort of depends on the circumstances. Evaluative  metering with it's averaging, especially in a scene with a wide dynamic range will rarely give a good exposure on your subject.  I tend to use spot metering a lot (including in Av & Tv) when there's substantial difference between the subject and the background and EV to compensate, when needed. I also use center weighted when the scene allows, though I don't feel it's as precise. CW is like the shotgun of metering, while spot is the rifle, both have their place.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

have you not been getting good exposures, or have you somehow been exposed to the idea that  using spot metering will somehow lead to better results?


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

I have found that there exists a certain group of people who are very fixated on spot metering,and they try to spread the gospel at every opportunity.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

One thing to keep in mind is that some cameras offer color analysis as well as reflectance analysis when using the light meter inside the camera. For example Nikon invented 3-D matrix metering  which knows the color and the amount of light reflected by the object, based upon 2016 or more color sensors, and this gives the camera the ability to analyze a scene measuring not only the reflectance amounts,  but also makes the meter aware of the actual colors of things within the scene.

  Matrix metering  was invented in the 1980s by Nikon in their camera called the FA. In the 21st century cameras now have the ability to determine the color of subjects within the frame, As well as to determine the brightness and reflective nature, and to set the exposure with amazing precision and accuracy. I would dispute smoke's allegation that evaluative metering can "seldom"  arrive at the correct exposure, at least as far as cameras from the Nikon corporation  are concerned. My experience is that matrix metering in modern Nikon cameras is very good at arriving at an extremely accurate processing of the image, as well as setting the right exposure. Modern cameras use very sophisticated programs  Which measure scene brightness range and contrast, and determine how the image data should be processed to make a satisfying picture in tricky lighting situations.

Of course many workers are unaware of the ability of their camera to do this, since their default mode is usually to turn this feature off.  A few years back the Canon company  decided to update its metering systems, and begin to incorporate color analysis as well as simple reflectance data measuring when it introduced the 7D model.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

One of the key features of a digital single lens reflex camera is allowing the camera to determine what the tone curve should be. In high contrast lighting, oftentimes a very flat or low contrast tone curve Will yield a very nice photograph. In flat low contrast lighting, oftentimes a very hard, high contrast tone curve will punch up the photo.

  As was said above, it all depends. There is more than one way to arrive at the destination. Many times people will attempt to outthink the high-speed computer that is running their camera, thinking that they can do better than the camera. I understand this fully  but as I have been at this longer and longer I realize that old ways of working are no longer the best ways, but that  sometimes letting the camera evaluate the scene brightness range in over 2000 specific areas can lead to amazingly good and fast evaluative metering results, especially since this approach has been refined since the Reagan era.

 My recollection is that Canon developed its first color aware system using 63 measuring areas spread over the frame. I think that was about 10 years ago, more or less.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

Around 2011 or 12, there was a guy who was having quite a bit of difficulty with his new Nikon's spot metering. He was taking meter readings and then either deliberately under exposing or over exposing, based upon 1960s ideas of 18% reflectance being the end goal of the light  meter reading. He was having difficulty because he was unaware that the camera was giving him suggested exposure settings that were based upon not just reflectance values, but that were already taking into account the color of the items that were metered.  In effect he was attempting to utilize old methods of working, and was attempting to impose a sort of zone system whilebworking with a digital camera that used 3-D  Color matrix metering.

 He was perplexed why he was getting so much over and under exposure when photographing light or dark objects. He was unaware that his camera was already accounting for the color differences. for example in the olden days a reflected light meter would typically try to make white snow 18% gray, and it was necessary to over expose meter readings taken from snow by about 1.5 to 1.7 stops, to make the snow appear white. With his modern  Nikon, The color measuring combined with the reflection metering was already adjusting the indicated exposure!


----------



## smoke665 (Jun 20, 2019)

Derrel said:


> Matrix metering was invented in the 1980s by Nikon in their camera called the FA. In the 21st century cameras now have the ability to determine the color of subjects within the frame, As well as to determine the brightness and reflective nature, and to set the exposure with amazing precision and accuracy. I would dispute smoke's allegation that evaluative metering can "seldom" arrive at the correct exposure, at least as far as cameras from the Nikon corporation are concerned. My experience is that matrix metering in modern Nikon cameras is very good at arriving at an extremely accurate processing of the image, as well as setting the right exposure.



Pentax first came out with CW metering in 1960's in the Spotmatic, which was later adopted by other manufacturers. The spot meter came later. Then in 1983 Nikon introduced the FA Multi Pattern metering, others soon followed suit, with similar evaluative types of metering. The thing to remember is they are tools, to be used appropriately. I don't hunt birds with a rifle or deer with a shot gun. 

_*would dispute smoke's allegation that evaluative metering can "seldom" arrive at the correct exposure,*_

Actually I said "_Evaluative metering with it's averaging, especially in a scene with a wide dynamic range will rarely give a good exposure on your subject_." you took my comment out of context. A correct exposure for a scene and a good exposure on your subject can be very different animals. Modern Pentax like Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Sony, etc, offer a plethora of automation from highlight protection, shadow recovery, tones, noise, so much so that I wonder why I'm even needed to press the shutter, but that's the difference between a photographer and picture taker. As a photographer I'm not interested in a "correct exposure" for a frame, but what reflects my vision for the shot. If you plan on using +/- exposure compensation to tailor the mood of your shots away from "correct" exposure, then it's best to use either centre weighted or spot metering. Segmented metering systems make exposure adjustments on their own and it's hard to know what compensation has already been applied - and it may vary with small changes in composition as highlights and shadows move from segment to segment.

Now bring me a camera that reads my mind and takes the perfect shot exactly as I envisioned it, without intervention on my part, and you'll have my attention. If it could fetch a cup of coffee at the same time, I'd be in heaven, but photography without challenge would be very boring IMO.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

No, I saw your comment that in _a scene with a wide dynamic range evaluative metering will seldom give the correct exposure _and I replied to it as written. I do not feel that I took your comment out of context. 

The title of this thread is about shooting swim meets and Tony has told us that most of his work is done outdoors and bright light. Having been swimming a few times in pools, and actually having photographing a couple of swim meets,  I am familiar with the shooting scenario.

As you mentioned earlier, it all depends.  There is no one cut and dried answer. Metering for example: with a wide angle lens large areas of either ground or sky can unduly influence the meter reading, but with a 300 to 400 mm telephoto lens the angle of view is pretty narrow, and the subject usually takes up a pretty large area of the metering circle. Since the 1960s, Nikon has used a scribed 12 mm circle in all of its cameras in the stock viewfinder screen, and in DSLR's since the D1, users can program how big the most-sensitive area of that circle should be. As I mentioned earlier, I do not think that spot metering is particularly advantageous when used in automatic modes of exposure setting. Similarly, I am not a big fan of using matrix metering when setting the exposure manually.


In a fairly repetitive shooting environment such as a swim meet at an outdoor pool, like I said , the exposure is typically pretty consistent from frame to frame. Do not blow the highlights, and ensure a decent exposure, and deal with any issues in post process. Over the past few years, the idea of exposing to the right has been replaced by _protect the highlights at all costs, then lift the shadows in post._

The way I work, getting the right exposure in camera is only part of the equation. I try not to blow the highlights by overexposing, even if that means that the shadow side looks pretty dark. I know that in post processing I can "lift the shadows up" (brightening them) and then apply the needed tone curve to make the kind of picture that I want to get.

Like I said, Tony should determine whether he is getting the desired results using Evaluative metering, and perhaps he should consider a second option to spot metering, which is the center weighted metering option.


----------



## TonyUSA (Jun 20, 2019)

Derrel said:


> have you not been getting good exposures, or have you somehow been exposed to the idea that  using spot metering will somehow lead to better results?



I got good exposures with Evaluative metering but someone told me to use spot metering so I just confuse and trying to get other opinion.


----------



## weepete (Jun 20, 2019)

I mostly use CWA for sports and birds, especially with auto ISO. Ocassionally I'll spot meter but that tends to be when I'm shooting in full manual mode (usually if I find i'm underexposing) and normally only in pretty even lighting conditions. 

Landscapes I tend to spot meter, but there's more time usually to work then.

I normally waste a few frames at the beginning, taking a few shots as the setup is done, to check the scene, see what's appropriate for different areas then I know roughly the range of movement and the settings I need to switch between.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2019)

Canon metering modes: how to get perfectly exposed images in any situation | TechRadar

Metering mode cheat sheet: how they work and when to use them | TechRadar


----------



## ac12 (Jun 23, 2019)

TonyUSA said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > have you not been getting good exposures, or have you somehow been exposed to the idea that  using spot metering will somehow lead to better results?
> ...



If you get GOOD exposure, I would not bother changing.  Don't break what works.

However, if you change lens or shoot at another pool, the exposure may be different.  So it is nice to know about options.
If you do try something else, expect to spend a bit of time refining it, to get a good exposure.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 24, 2019)

Derrel said:


> I have found that there exists a certain group of people who are very fixated on spot metering,and they try to spread the gospel at every opportunity.





TonyUSA said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > have you not been getting good exposures, or have you somehow been exposed to the idea that  using spot metering will somehow lead to better results?
> ...



As I said earlier,"_I have found that there exists a certain group of people who are very fixated on spot metering,and they try to spread the gospel at every opportunity."_

As ac12 wrote, "*don't break what works*."


----------

