Originally posted by Marc Sabatella Sort of, but not really. Shots like this are not about being able to understand up front how much compensation will be needed - that's actually going to be next to impossible, because depending on exactly how you frame the shot, the meter is likely to give wildly different exposures. Shots like this are more about understanding the relationship betwene light and shaodw and figuring out how to meter such that you are not subject to those sort of random fluctuations. You may indeed need to also apply compensation, but the real trick is doing the metering in the first palce so as to give consistent results. Eg, spot metering only off the black fur, or only the white - or "substitute metering" (metering off something else that is in the same light as your subject and is has similar value ranges).
Mark , yes my thought train probably not expressed that clearly is,
1 by trying different exposures and examining the results and having found [for my eye] the best one I can then look at the histograms and get a feel for what I need to see on the histogram preview shot.
2 once I get that to that sort of fairly consistent result then that will I hope lead [ in time with practise] to being able to identify the best point to meter on to obtain that [to my eye anyway] best balanced exposure.
As far as the dog example goes I would I think have used the in camera flash turned down to -2 just to highlight the fur.
Alistair