Thanks. I thought that if you take a meter reading from a white card it would tend to yield an underexposed image as meters are calibrated to give proper exposures to average scenes (gray card being representative of an average scene). The white balance issue is one thing but exposures is what I'm interested in. Why would a lighter gray card be better for digital cameras? Jorj On 23/10/09 2:59 AM, "karl shah-jenner" <shahjen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > AllJorj Takacs > > Thank you for the responses so far, but this gray card i lighter than > the normal gray card. And, they say it's just for "digital" cameras. > It thought that gray cards represented an average scene, what > difference does it make if your metering with a film camera or a > digital camera. Average is average! > > > > Ah - I think its as trevor suggested, more for making an accurate white > balance than for exposures, that's why it wouldn't work for a film camera. > > In film photography we know a grey card to be 18% grey with often a colour > bias (from production) - the colour isn't a problem for film as much as it > is important to have an accurate density > > for digital white balance readings, colour accuracy is more important that > density. > > it's a good idea really to use a grey card for a white balance over a white > card - it's been argued that a white card is more likely to yield an > overexposed reading.. and an overexposure tends to be white, irrespective > of slight colour variations > > this make sense? > > karl >
