Sounds like it.
> I live WAY out in the boonies with NO photo stores around so:
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Nat
> I lightly sprayed a white card with black paint until my reflected-light
> meter read it the same as the meter (with the incident light bubble on it)
> read the light source (sun) .
>
> Have I now a usable "gray card"?
Yes.
You can use just about anything as a grey card if you are willing to
'calibrate' it:
o Meter a white sheet of paper and meter a 'typical scene' or measure
the incident light. Note the difference in the reading from the sheet
of white paper - this is a the 'calibration factor'. Use the white
paper as a grey card and apply this calibration factor to the
meter reading of the grey card.
o One's hand makes a good grey-card substitute: meter the palm of the hand
and open up one stop.
A 'neutral' grey card - where the card has no color - is a sometimes useful
thing to have in color photography.

Signature
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
Fstop timer - http://www.nolindan.com/da/fstop/index.htm
>I live WAY out in the boonies with NO photo stores around
>so:
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Nat
If it reads the same its usable. Actually, you can use a
white card. Kodak gray cards are white on the back with
about 90% reflectivity. White paper withou brighteners is
around this. Simply devide the reading by 5, or set the film
speed for five times the value you want. I think you can get
sheets of art paper with better diffusing surfaces than the
usual gray card. My Kodak cards have a considerable amount
of specular reflection which makes it necessary to be very
careful of the angle of light vs: meter.

Signature
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Probably not, the Gray Card (my caps) reflects about 18% white light but
also about equal amounts of the red, green, and blue components (which I
guess is why white light is white). But your gray card is probably "gray
enough" for the real word (assuming that the meter in your camera is
calibrated to an 18% reflectance (and some are not) and that your camera
meter was looking only at the card and that there was no stray light coming
in the eyepiece of your camera while you metered the card you made and ...
oh heck ... it's fine ... never mind.
Real Gray Cards get dirty, change with time, etc. MacBeth Color Checkers
aren't perfect either and are not stable over time (and I think MacBeth
changed the standard a couple of times, too.).
So find what works, the only problem I have with you system is that it's not
very repeatable. Might be better to find a color of Formica that matches
18% and but a 3x6 foot sheet and cut it up into a pile of gray cards or a
shade of automotive primer (gray) that's close enough to live with. Or even
gray matt board. So that you have a supply of identical cards but that's
just me fussin' again.

Signature
darkroommike
> I live WAY out in the boonies with NO photo stores around so:
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Nat
nat - 03 Mar 2006 21:20 GMT
> Probably not, the Gray Card (my caps) reflects about 18% white light but
> also about equal amounts of the red, green, and blue components (which I
> guess is why white light is white)....oh heck ... it's fine ... never
> mind.
>
> So find what works....
Thank you, Mike, for the learned treatise. You got me thinking(?) and I came
up with the memory of the suggestion to just use the palm of my hand for a
target. I went out and tried it....WOW...only 1/2 stop off the incident
reading.
Should work OK...I wash 'em every week or so, dirty or not.
Thanks again,
Nat nhooCLOTHESh616(at)yahoo(dot)com
Oxford, AR
(please remove CLOTHES to eee-mail)
Richard Knoppow - 06 Mar 2006 00:43 GMT
>> Probably not, the Gray Card (my caps) reflects about 18%
>> white light but
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> Oxford, AR
> (please remove CLOTHES to eee-mail)
You may find the back of your hand is even closer. A
white card can be used instead of a gray card if its
reflectivity is assmumed to be about 90%. This will be
pretty close. Devide the reading by 5 or multiply the film
speed by 5.

Signature
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
nat - 06 Mar 2006 01:10 GMT
> You may find the back of your hand is even closer.
Thanks Richard. I tried that, but my old hand is so wrinkled the angle
becomes fussy.

Signature
Nat nhoclothesop616(at)yahoo(dot)com
Oxford, AR
(please remove clothes to eee-mail)
Bogdan Karasek - 06 Mar 2006 01:31 GMT
Hi all,
I've measured the palm of my hand against a Kodak 18% and I have just
under an f difference. Very handy. I also have a T-shirt that I bought
at the Kodak Museum in Rochester that is 18% grey and has 18% print on
the back. Actually it's .5f off from the Kodak Paper Card, probably
because the T-shirt is cotton and thus not very, very reflective.
Regards, Bogdan
>>>Probably not, the Gray Card (my caps) reflects about 18%
>>>white light but
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> pretty close. Devide the reading by 5 or multiply the film
> speed by 5.

Signature
__________________________________________________________________
Bogdan Karasek
Montréal, Québec e-mail: bkarasek@videotron.ca
Canada
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
"What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence"
Ludwig Wittgenstein
________________________________________________________________
nailer - 06 Mar 2006 11:25 GMT
it means it is not 18%. maybe after a few days in your garb?
fons - 20 Mar 2006 19:30 GMT
hm... did you wash your hands first ?
;-)
BTW I'd use a non-reflecting gray paint and make it cover the card
fully instead of spraying partially covering black paint.
nat - 22 Mar 2006 13:35 GMT
> hm... did you wash your hands first ?
> ;-)
Now and then.
> BTW I'd use a non-reflecting gray paint and make it cover the card
> fully instead of spraying partially covering black paint.
H'm...that's probably a good way to go, but I enjoyed fiddling with it to
get it just right.
Nat