In article , WKato <WKato@xxxxxxx> writes
>Although I haven't measured it, the ratio of horizontally to vertically
>polarized light probably isn't very different from 50/50, say 40/60 or 60/40.
>In landscape photography we would seldom find light polarized solely in one
>orientation (the exception might be light reflecting off of water). Your
>exposure is off so little that you're not noticing it. In addition, there's
>also the 50/50 chance that the polarized light that gets to your meter is of
>the correct orientation. Also, to deepen the blue in skies, the polarizer
>works best 90 degrees from the location of the sun. In this orientation, the
>light you would be blocking out would be at 45 degrees from any metering
>system. So, turn your polarizer and watch you meter. If there's a large
>difference from one filter orientation to another, then bracket at lot.
>
Do as Warren suggests, but FIRST make sure you are viewing a non-
polarised scene (such as a diffusely lit wall) by looking through the
polariser directly (not fitted to the camera) for lighting and
darkening. With a non-polarised scene there will be no change as the
filter is rotated. Now put it on the camera, view the same scene and
observe the meter as the filter rotates. If the reading changes - and
it certainly will on a 3 or 4 - then you need a circular polariser. The
amount that the meter changes by gives you a measure of the maximum
exposure inaccuracy you can expect.
Doing as Warren suggests with a polarised scene will ALWAYS give a
change of meter reading - even with a circular polariser.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|