Author Topic: Sunny 16 Rule (Read 43012 times)

Jack Johnson · « **Reply #50 on:** October 29, 2011, 06:18:52 PM »

I have a Gossen Pilot II that I've had since the dawn of time, and a Weston 853 that my wife found for $1. I checked the accuracy of the Weston and it's fine, but I still find it faster and easier (and, let's be honest, more fun) to sunny/16 with my meterless and dead-batteried. Sometimes I check my guess with the meter after the fact, sometimes I "bracket" by taking a sunny/16 and a metered shot to compare the two later.

Most fun is to keep a meter handy so when I see a scene that makes me question my sunny/16 guess, I can meter it, get that feedback, and use that to hone future guesses. Lately it's been very helpful to remind me that there is no more "high noon" at these latitudes and it's "sunny/11" until the snow flies.

Plus, with some scenes, sometimes it just makes it easy. I'll say, oh yeah, duh, that thing over there is the important exposure, and all the rest will fall into place:

Independence Mine by knapjack, on Flickr

Nigel · « **Reply #51 on:** April 15, 2012, 07:48:02 PM »

In preparation for heading out with my Fed 2 I've been trying to hone my Sunny 16 technique and it had me wondering, if I'm in doubt, I assume it's best to err on the side of underexposure rather than overexposure would you agree?

If it matters I'm thinking of portraits.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #52 on:** April 15, 2012, 07:53:41 PM »

Quote from: Nigel on April 15, 2012, 07:48:02 PM

In preparation for heading out with my Fed 2 I've been trying to hone my Sunny 16 technique and it had me wondering, if I'm in doubt, I assume it's best to err on the side of underexposure rather than overexposure would you agree? If it matters I'm thinking of portraits.

More a question of negative film or trannie. I'd always incline towards overexposing neg film, especially if scanning.

moominsean · « **Reply #53 on:** April 15, 2012, 08:57:54 PM »

depends on the degree of over/underexposure. i prefer to slightly underexpose ektar for better tones. with color film, it seems to be easier to adjust for underexposure as over is usually missing detail in the bright areas. i tend to start at 250 and f16 in sunlight. a lot of it specific to format...i overexpose polaroid iduv and 669.

Francois · « **Reply #54 on:** April 15, 2012, 09:44:21 PM »

I guess it depends a lot on the look you're going for and whether it's color of B&W.

In color negatives, underexposure will make the tones muddy. Overexposures will bring colors that are more pastel or pop depending by how much you overexpose.

On B&W, the film has a lot more latitude so this is a bit less of an issue.

Don't forget the classic rule to expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights.
If film doesn't record shadow detail, you can't recreate it. On the other hand, highlights tend to already contain less information. I would be tempted to say that, unless the subject calls for blocked shadows, overexposure is a lesser evil.

But if you use a modern emulsion like T-Max, one stop under is hardly noticeable.

But for slide film, it's a whole different story. And instant film is a whole other ballpark.

sapata · « **Reply #55 on:** April 15, 2012, 09:47:20 PM »

My experience with B&W 100 ISO is, whenever I'm using the sunny 16 rule (which it's been a lot lately) I tend to get underexposured negatives (against my wishes), and that it's been a pain to get decent scans. Maybe is because is too much underexposured... I don't know.

David A-W · « **Reply #56 on:** April 15, 2012, 09:57:14 PM »

This weekend I've been privileged to see some very old photograps from the National Maritime Museum's collections - including wet collodion photographs from the 1854 expedition to Greenland to discover what happened to Franklin's expedition to find the North-West Passage. Some of these photographs are beautifully exposed - higlights and shadow detail in arctic landscapes: it occured to me that perhaps all the sophistication of multi-mode metering, or spot-metering, has somehow lost the track. What I'd like to know is how photographers before, say, 1950, knew what exposure was right: they clearly did.

LT · « **Reply #57 on:** April 15, 2012, 10:37:10 PM »

David - I think the answer lies in the amount of silver in early emulsions giving a much greater lattitude, and the widespread use of compensating developers like pyrogallol.

Mauricio - I find sunny 16 always underexposes film in uk light ... I always opt for a sunny 11 instead.

Nigel - if b&w, always overexpose if in doubt. overexposed Highlights can be tamed in development but unde exposed shadows will never be recovered.

sapata · « **Reply #58 on:** April 15, 2012, 10:58:57 PM »

Quote from: Leon on April 15, 2012, 10:37:10 PM

Mauricio - I find sunny 16 always underexposes film in uk light ... I always opt for a sunny 11 instead.

I thought about that as well Leon, but the last time I was in Brazil I had similar results... it's either me or I'm under developing my films?

Francois · « **Reply #59 on:** April 16, 2012, 02:54:16 PM »

Could be that. It could also be a camera thing. Shutters are not always precise (unless you have a Nikon F4-F5-F6).

But it's true that the rule of Sunny/16, while pretty reasonable, doesn't apply everywhere. I know people who live in the mountains have to use sunny/22. I guess it just goes to show how much you have to adjust.

LT · « **Reply #60 on:** April 16, 2012, 04:23:18 PM »

also depends on the developer you are using - if you have a speed reduction, then your sunny 16 would have to take this into consideration ... developers like Perceptol will lose you up to a whole stop in film speed!

sapata · « **Reply #61 on:** April 16, 2012, 07:07:04 PM »

Quote from: Francois on April 16, 2012, 02:54:16 PM

Could be that. It could also be a camera thing. Shutters are not always precise (unless you have a Nikon F4-F5-F6).

It's true... I guess bracketing needs to be considered.

Quote from: Francois on April 16, 2012, 02:54:16 PM

But it's true that the rule of Sunny/16, while pretty reasonable, doesn't apply everywhere. I know people who live in the mountains have to use sunny/22. I guess it just goes to show how much you have to adjust.

For sure... in fact the first 2 pics on this post were taken in London and they seems to be underexposured...

Quote from: Leon on April 16, 2012, 04:23:18 PM

also depends on the developer you are using - if you have a speed reduction, then your sunny 16 would have to take this into consideration ... developers like Perceptol will lose you up to a whole stop in film speed!

I always use Rodinal Leon... What's speed reduction?

Ordinal · « **Reply #62 on:** April 16, 2012, 07:14:51 PM »

Quote from: sapata on April 16, 2012, 07:07:04 PM

For sure... in fact the first 2 pics on this post were taken in London and they seems to be underexposured...

I live in London, and I've been trying to learn Sunny 16 recently, and everything seems to come out underexposed. Basically I have to use the Sunny 11 rule. I don't think you people in other parts of the world have the same sun we do here.

Nigel · « **Reply #63 on:** April 16, 2012, 07:25:42 PM »

Thanks guys, I think the take away from that is my sunny 16 estimation is never going to be accurate enough to over or underexpose, I think I'll just go with what seems right!

DaveMiller · « **Reply #64 on:** April 16, 2012, 07:36:17 PM »

Quote from: Ordinal on April 16, 2012, 07:14:51 PM

Quote from: sapata on April 16, 2012, 07:07:04 PM
For sure... in fact the first 2 pics on this post were taken in London and they seems to be underexposured...

I live in London, and I've been trying to learn Sunny 16 recently, and everything seems to come out underexposed. Basically I have to use the Sunny 11 rule. I don't think you people in other parts of the world have the same sun we do here.

Considering what you Londoners pump into your atmosphere

I think sunny8 may get you closer; whilst here in the sunny $:-\$ midlands I find that sunny11 is usually appropriate.

LT · « **Reply #65 on:** April 16, 2012, 07:45:52 PM »

Good question Mauricio ... But only you can answer it. All kinds of things will affect the speed - you agitation technique, your water supply, developer dilution, temperature, film age etc etc etc.

Sounds like you might want to slow it down a bit though.

Francois · « **Reply #66 on:** April 16, 2012, 08:36:34 PM »

Speed reduction is often present with ultra fine grain developers.
Lets say you take some t-max 100. If you process it in standard developers, it's speed is ISO 100. But if you process it in Microdol-X, the speed drops down to ISO 50.
T-Max 400 does the same thing even in HC-110 dil.B where its speed is ISO 320. Only ISO 200 when done in Microdol-X.

sapata · « **Reply #67 on:** June 07, 2012, 12:47:40 AM »

Thought I add another chart to the collection... a bit strange they're asking to select 1/500 with 200ISO...

Quite like the lady drinking cocktail on F11

Photo_Utopia · « **Reply #68 on:** June 07, 2012, 08:50:51 AM »

Here's on from the sunny 1970's– a Kodacolor II Note free Leica 'Barnack' cutting guide

Francois · « **Reply #69 on:** January 23, 2013, 02:47:11 PM »

Just reviving an old topic to keep things clean and organized.
I was just going through an old 1950's photo book that is loaded with weird and esoteric looking exposure calculation methods and computers.
This is one of the strange ones. I don't know how well it works but it sure looks interesting. It's the first time I stumble on a computer that takes into account the month of the year in its calculations!

Here's the quick scan I made (sorry for not straightening it).

sapata · « **Reply #70 on:** January 23, 2013, 03:19:32 PM »

I can't check right now, but I think i've got something similar on a metal plate on the back of a camera... and I think it's my Rolleiflex!

astrobeck · « **Reply #71 on:** January 23, 2013, 04:16:44 PM »

That's a clever calculator...but I think it was made for the Northern Hemisphere.

The sun angle is different at different times of the year but in June when sunlight is stronger north of the equator, it's weaker on the southern half of the world....
People near the equator would have different values too....

Sorry, it's that astro-geek coming out of me....

LEAFotography · « **Reply #72 on:** January 23, 2013, 09:02:58 PM »

They've turned out pretty well!

And what a colourful set of Sunny 16 resources!

And it's reminded me of how I howled with laughter, having the idea of "learning to meter light with my eyes . . .", wondering if I could do it over the course of a year, and joining this group and seeing Alan has this as his signature line...what a wonderful group

Francois · « **Reply #73 on:** January 23, 2013, 09:11:14 PM »

Quote from: astrobeck on January 23, 2013, 04:16:44 PM

Sorry, it's that astro-geek coming out of me....

In the southern hemisphere, you'd have to reverse the list. And between both tropics, having an adjustment for the months would be pretty useless...

Jack Johnson · « **Reply #74 on:** January 24, 2013, 05:41:41 AM »

Quote from: Francois on January 23, 2013, 09:11:14 PM

Quote from: astrobeck on January 23, 2013, 04:16:44 PM
Sorry, it's that astro-geek coming out of me....
In the southern hemisphere, you'd have to reverse the list. And between both tropics, having an adjustment for the months would be pretty useless...

But you could adjust for the heat and the humidity.

Francois · « **Reply #75 on:** January 24, 2013, 03:50:18 PM »

Don't get me going on heat (or the lack of it). When I woke up at 5 this morning, the outside thermometer was peaking at around -40°C. Took me about an hour to stop shivering just from seeing this!

original_ann · « **Reply #76 on:** January 29, 2013, 12:26:56 AM »

Quote from: gary m on June 16, 2011, 02:00:48 AM

Fred Parker system here- Ultimate Exposure Computer http://goo.gl/tN8E

I always vow to commit this chart to memory every year. Never have, but I keep it folded up in my camera bag and it has come in VERY handy if the batteries die in my light meter.

original_ann · « **Reply #77 on:** January 29, 2013, 12:30:12 AM »

Oh, and let's not forget the "Looney 11 Rule": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looney_11_rule

Jack Johnson · « **Reply #78 on:** January 29, 2013, 04:53:58 AM »

Quote from: original_ann on January 29, 2013, 12:30:12 AM

Oh, and let's not forget the "Looney 11 Rule": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looney_11_rule

That Looney rule seems Looney. It seems like it would be something like ISO100 at f/11 for 100 seconds for a subject lit by the full moon.

LT · « **Reply #79 on:** January 29, 2013, 08:17:41 AM »

Quote from: Jack Johnson on January 29, 2013, 04:53:58 AM

That Looney rule seems Looney. It seems like it would be something like ISO100 at f/11 for 100 seconds for a subject lit by the full moon.

Jack - I read it as 1/100 sec at f11 - which seems too short to me! That is the sunny 11 rule that I use for daylight here in UK. No way that would work at night.

LT · « **Reply #80 on:** January 29, 2013, 08:20:44 AM »

I wonder if this is for photos OF the moon - it would make sense then - but not for photos of things in thee light of the moon. We need our resident astro-brain to chip in here.

Jack Johnson · « **Reply #81 on:** January 29, 2013, 02:33:32 PM »

Leon, I think you're right. No sign of Becky yet, but I did find this:

http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/TRIPOD/TRIPOD4.HTM

Also, I broke out my sunny/16 cheat sheet, and a subject lit by the full moon (EV -3) would be something like f/16 @ 1600/ISO minutes.

Francois · « **Reply #82 on:** January 29, 2013, 06:27:39 PM »

I just checked my old Kodak chart and a moonlit landscape would be 8 seconds at f/2 on 400 ISO film.
A moonlit scene would be 3 minutes at f/2.8 on 400 ISO...

I do have something a bit more cooky than that in my books... I'll go hunt for it.

Francois · « **Reply #83 on:** January 29, 2013, 07:23:13 PM »

OK, I found it!
How to use your camera to as a fadeout stop exposure calculator.

Rafael Morales · « **Reply #84 on:** January 31, 2013, 11:34:10 PM »

this is from my Kodak Pony II I has anybody used one of these?

Francois · « **Reply #85 on:** February 01, 2013, 02:53:35 PM »

One thing's for sure, you have to give them credit for their colour work

Diane Peterson · « **Reply #86 on:** February 01, 2013, 04:17:38 PM »

Quote from: Rafael Morales on January 31, 2013, 11:34:10 PM

this is from my Kodak Pony II I has anybody used one of these?

I just found one of these cameras for $4.00 and it included all these little cards in pristine condition!

Francois · « **Reply #87 on:** May 02, 2013, 08:41:10 PM »

I just found this on Make.
Not an exposure chart in itself but still pretty cool.

sapata · « **Reply #88 on:** May 02, 2013, 09:02:23 PM »

Quote from: Francois on May 02, 2013, 08:41:10 PM

I just found this on Make.
Not an exposure chart in itself but still pretty cool.

Wow... so many colours!

Francois · « **Reply #89 on:** May 02, 2013, 09:06:01 PM »

What I find funny is how Canons and Nikons operate in reverse on just about everything!

sapata · « **Reply #90 on:** May 02, 2013, 10:46:17 PM »

I've never noticed that! I've always used Canon and to me increase exposure means "right" on the dial ! I would be very confused with a Nikon...

Klaus · « **Reply #91 on:** May 02, 2013, 11:12:09 PM »

Quote from: sapata on April 15, 2012, 09:47:20 PM

My experience with B&W 100 ISO is, whenever I'm using the sunny 16 rule (which it's been a lot lately) I tend to get underexposured negatives (against my wishes), and that it's been a pain to get decent scans. Maybe is because is too much underexposured... I don't know.

There is/was a saying in German:

"Wenn Sonne lacht Blende 8" - when the sun laughs use F 8.

I would assume this is from the days when ASA100 was a fast film in general use. Can't remember if I tried this at all but might be the answer to your issue above.

astrobeck · « **Reply #92 on:** May 02, 2013, 11:35:00 PM »

Quote from: Francois on May 02, 2013, 08:41:10 PM

I just found this on Make.
Not an exposure chart in itself but still pretty cool.

Now THAT would make a nice T-shirt graphic!

Chris A Fraser · « **Reply #93 on:** May 03, 2013, 12:17:07 AM »

or a darkroom/workspace poster.

Francois · « **Reply #94 on:** May 03, 2013, 01:32:33 PM »

I might try and blow it up using the Blow-up plugin...

Francois · « **Reply #95 on:** August 25, 2013, 10:16:27 PM »

Just reviving a really old thread to show you a "new" guide I found!
It's from the Film's Not Dead site and can be a great way to have the kids help out

Here's the fold-up exposure meter.

And the full instructions

hookstrapped · « **Reply #96 on:** August 26, 2013, 03:04:00 AM »

Quote

http://www.redbubble.com/people/rool/t-shirts/3114482-sunny-16-rule-black-inverted

Ha!
done already...

I have that! It's my favorite stupid photography shirt.