"Expose for the shadows"

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Two points I haven't seen mentioned yet:

 

1) "expose for the shadows" - at least in the zone system sense - does not mean to simply meter the shadows and use that exposure raw from the meter. Doing so will result in gross overexposure, since a meter will try to render whatever it is pointed at as "18% gray."

 

In the Zone system, you meter the shadows - and then ADJUST from that indicated exposure to "place the shadows" correctly on the tonal scale.

 

I.E. the meter will tell you "expose this shadow area at 1/30 and f/5.6 to make it medium gray." It is then up to you to calculate (or "pre-visualize" - to use Ansel Adams' phrase) "Well, I don't WANT that shadow to be medium gray (Zone V), I want it to be just distinguishable from black (Zone II)," and then reduce the exposure appropriately by 3 stops/zones - to 1/250 and f/5.6.

 

You've based the exposure on the shadows - but not exposed blindly for the shadows only.

 

2) The problem with "expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights" is that it doesn't work if you have 36 exposures of different-contrast subjects. No way to develop frames 10, 15, and 16 each differently (unless you are really good at using scissors in pitch darkness to cut exactly between frames 15 and 16 without cutting THROUGH frame 15 or 16 ).

 

It was intended for use with sheet film, where each picture always received separate development anyway - or with MF systems where you could have 5 rolls of the same film loaded into separate backs assigned to "very contrasty, contrasty, 'normal', flat, and very flat" scenes, pick the right back for the contrast range of any given picture, and thus develop similar scenes together on one roll. One reason Adams LOVED the Hassy system.

 

For 35mm, the approach of AndyB and others is a good "low-rent" application of the principle - overexpose and underdevelop slightly for the whole roll, to keep any contrasty situations under control. And then count on grade 4 paper (or VC filter) if needed for the occasional "foggy day" low-contrast shot on the same roll.

Edited July 7, 2011 by adan

[StS]

Just to add, over-exposing and under-developing will it also make easier to keep the dynamic range of the negative inside the maximum dynamic range of a film scanner.

 

If I understand the concept correctly, there needs one step to be added for the zone system - to calibrate the material to find a exposure / film development / paper grade / paper exposure combination, where the dynamic range in the print will be exactly ten stops wide. Which is another advantage of sheet film, to be able to process every negative individually.

 

Stefan

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[WarriorJazz]

Two points I haven't seen mentioned yet:

 

1) "expose for the shadows" - at least in the zone system sense - does not mean to simply meter the shadows and use that exposure raw from the meter. Doing so will result in gross overexposure, since a meter will try to render whatever it is pointed at as "18% gray."

 

In the Zone system, you meter the shadows - and then ADJUST from that indicated exposure to "place the shadows" correctly on the tonal scale.

 

I.E. the meter will tell you "expose this shadow area at 1/30 and f/5.6 to make it medium gray." It is then up to you to calculate (or "pre-visualize" - to use Ansel Adams' phrase) "Well, I don't WANT that shadow to be medium gray (Zone V), I want it to be just distinguishable from black (Zone II)," and then reduce the exposure appropriately by 3 stops/zones - to 1/250 and f/5.6.

 

You've based the exposure on the shadows - but not exposed blindly for the shadows only.

 

2) The problem with "expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights" is that it doesn't work if you have 36 exposures of different-contrast subjects. No way to develop frames 10, 15, and 16 each differently (unless you are really good at using scissors in pitch darkness to cut exactly between frames 15 and 16 without cutting THROUGH frame 15 or 16 ).

 

It was intended for use with sheet film, where each picture always received separate development anyway - or with MF systems where you could have 5 rolls of the same film loaded into separate backs assigned to "very contrasty, contrasty, 'normal', flat, and very flat" scenes, pick the right back for the contrast range of any given picture, and thus develop similar scenes together on one roll. One reason Adams LOVED the Hassy system.

 

For 35mm, the approach of AndyB and others is a good "low-rent" application of the principle - overexpose and underdevelop slightly for the whole roll, to keep any contrasty situations under control. And then count on grade 4 paper (or VC filter) if needed for the occasional "foggy day" low-contrast shot on the same roll.

 

Thank you for your explanation. This was very clear and helpful!

[Xmas]

Hi

 

Suggest you need to make up the zone table compensation for your meter, or memorise the number in previous post or use a Weston meter which has (the same) Weston's and Adam's zone values on it already.

 

If the film supplier's 'ISO' is to the ISO standard, the zone 0 or 1 are fixed separation from the 18% 'grey' scale normally iused by the merter for an average reflectance, or incident reading. Not all the suppliers use pukka ISO values.

 

You also need to know how wide scale a film is if you measure off the high lights e.g. on a snow sceane.

 

Noel

[Twotone]

Yes.

 

For development, take them to a shop with a C41 machine. There is a standard development process that works. Let them do it - it is cheap and fast and probably more consistent than you can manage.

 

In fact, you should do a test to determine what ASA your camera/meter/film combination requires (this is the key - you should test). But in my (and many others) experience, those two films are actually best exposed for 200 ASA. For the test (and some quite good explanations see Digital Photography Courses | Ansel Adams Zone System).

 

 

Thanks Michael,

 

I've been using mainly Ilford SP2 but I have used some BW400CN too super since January (processed in a Boots one hour lab) in an M3 with a type 2 Cron and have been happy with the results however there are some contrast issues and there are some colour cast issues in the photographs, certainly with the Ilford film which has a slight shade of green to my eyes.

 

I've been looking for some slower film for the summer as I never thought about over exposing those films so I recently bought some HP4 Plus to try that with a mind to send it to a lab for processing as I don't process my own film at the moment.

 

BTW, do you have to shoot an entire roll of film at 200 asa or can you jump back and forth so to speak between 200 and 400?

 

Thanks.

 

Tony

[Charlie Johnson]

Tony,

 

Green tint on your prints is down to Boots printer being set for colour. You should point out it is a black and white film and the printer should calibrated accordingly. And ask for a free reprint They will probably moan and deny though. I use North Wales Photographic mail order and don't have those problems.

 

If you want a variable iso film use Tri-x and use any iso from 400-1600 on the same roll and develop in Diafine. If I can do it anyone can.

[Xmas]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi

 

HP5+ always needs 400 it is not like XP2, it also needs a pro lab for development, you take more risks (of burning highlights) if you use 200.

 

XP2 is better at 200 or 100 than 400, and the mini labs can develope and print it. XP2 has more latitude then HP5+.

 

Developing your own monochrome (like HP5) is easy, but you need all the kit and spare time in evenings. People will jump up and down and tell you what developer they use.

 

ILFORD PHOTO - Developing Black & White Film

 

You can use bulk or cine 35mm if you have a changing bag or dark room.

 

Noel

[Twotone]

Tony,

 

Green tint on your prints is down to Boots printer being set for colour. You should point out it is a black and white film and the printer should calibrated accordingly. And ask for a free reprint They will probably moan and deny though. I use North Wales Photographic mail order and don't have those problems.

 

If you want a variable iso film use Tri-x and use any iso from 400-1600 on the same roll and develop in Diafine. If I can do it anyone can.

 

Thanks Charlie,

 

I'll give NWP a go with this latest batch of film I'm going to shoot (going to Cornwall at the weekend for a week ) then I'll try doing my own with Tri-X etc.

 

The only thing putting me off processing my own film, apart from buying the equipment and the time &etc, is the thought of printing from the negs and then scanning the negs onto a disc/pc.

 

I like the convenience of the one hour photo thing for the moment but the limited asa speed was leading me to look at other film but obviously being able to expose it at 200 asa is a big help:cool:

 

Regards

 

Tony

 

PS, apologies to the OP for hijacking the thread guys.

 

PPS, Charlie do you have a web address for NWP? Couldn't find them with Google.

Edited July 7, 2011 by Twotone

[StS]

One more detail on exposure of images being not 13% grey in average - the spot meter of the Olympus OM4 has a "highlight" and "shadow" programme. "Shadow" will lead to an under-exposure of 2 2/3 stops, "high-lights" to an over-exposure of 2 stops. Olympus clearly calculated for reversal film here. Pretty ingenious system though...

 

Stefan

[adan]

I've looked into the Zone System a while back and it confused me. It all seemed a bit complex.

 

Actually, it is less complex than most of the explanations (even this one), at least once you have done the preparatory test work.

 

1. Find the PRINT exposure that will just barely print unexposed-film-base-plus-fog as pure black.

 

Process an unexposed piece of film for manufacturer's recommended time (including development - it will add fog that needs to be accounted for).

 

Make a print of that blank film with a series of short exposures (say, 2 seconds) while slowly uncovering the print paper in steps, so that you end up with cumulative exposed stripes on the paper of 2,4,6,8,10,12....etc. seconds. Then cover half the paper in the other direction and give it a good long additional exposure to guarantee that that half is pure black. Process the print per manufacturers recommended time (3 minutes dev., usually), and find the minimum striped exposure band that just equals the "pure" black. Say it is 16 seconds at f/8 - that will forever be your basic printing exposure for a perfect negative - any film density above "blank" film will print just lighter than black)

 

2. Find the TRUE ISO (a.k.a. EI - Exposure Index) for your film and meter and shutter and lens and developer.

 

Get an 18% gray card. Meter it using the "official" ISO on the film box. Set your actual exposure 4 stops "under" from the meter reading to move the gray card to Zone 1 (barely different from unexposed - but no texture/detail), and expose 5-7 frames of the gray card (filling the frame) bracketed 1/3 stop around that exposure. Develop according to manufacturer's recommendations. Print each of those negs using the print time detemined in step 1 - and also give half of each print a "nuke" exposure for a "definite" black. Process the prints as in step 1. Find the print where there is just barely a difference between your exposure from the negative, and the "nuked" pure black half of the paper - the neg and ISO that produced that print is your personal EI for future use.

 

3. Find your NORMAL film development time.

 

Take your 18% gray card. Meter it with your new-found ISO speed. Make 5 exposures, overexposing all of them 4 stops (no bracketing) so that the gray card is recorded as a highlight barely distinguishable from white (Zone 9). You'll be developing these separately, so you'll have to do this on 5 separate rolls for roll film (or 3 rolls, which you can cut in half to develop each half separately - just bang off 24 frames at the same exposure on each roll.)

 

Make 5 developing runs, one using the manufacturer's recommended time, and 4 more at plus/minus 7% and 10%. You end up with 5 dense negs of slightly different densities. Print each of those using your Step 1 print time and processing, while covering half the paper so that it gets NO exposure. Compare the 5 prints. Find the one where the printed area is just barely visibly grayer than the unexposed part of the paper - your "normal" development time will be the one you used for that negative (you do need to keep notes and keep track of which neg got which development. )

 

If the manufacturer's recommend time happens to be grossly wrong for your equipment, and none of the negs will print just barely grayer than white (either all too dense or all too thin), you may have to repeat this step using a higher or lower base developing time. Usually this doesn't happen, though.

__________________________________

 

Note that all these steps only need to be done ONCE. Once you know your basic print time, ISO, and development time, you are theoretically set for life (or at least until your preferred film/chemical supplier changes their film, developer or paper formula).

 

Also, up until this point, everything you've done applies to roll film as well as sheet film - you've calibrated your whole image chain to exactly capture 7 stops (Zones) with texture (9 stops between textureless not-quite black and not-quite white, 11 stops including pure black and white)

__________________

 

4. There's one more step to complete the full Zone system, if you really can develop each image separately. This is where you find out HOW to "develop for the highlights" - per image.

 

Essentially, repeat Step 3, except bracketing 2 stops over and under-exposure around Zone 9 in half stops (4 exposures each side of Zone 9 - you don't need to repeat Zone 9 itself). You'll need 8 of EACH bracketed exposure series (64 sheets of film, or 8 rolls or partial rolls of film) - but again, ideally you only have to do this once.

 

Then develop each of the overexposed bracketed exposures at your "normal" development time adjusted -7%, -10%, -14% and -20%. Develop each of the underexposed bracketed exposures at "normal" +7%, +10%, +14%, and +20%.

 

Repeat the "almost-white on white" print tests for all the negs to find which development times will "expand" 7-to-8.5-zone low-contrast subjects to 9 zones, and compress 9.5-to-11-zone high-contrast subjects to 9 zones.

 

At this point you are now equipped with 9 different developing times to use with 9 different highlight/contrast ranges.

 

Some photographers use densitometers instead of test prints, and/or reduce the number of extra development times and exposure brackets by eliminating the half-stops. I always just did the test-print route.

______________________________

 

From then on, you meter a shadow where you just barely want shadow detail and adjust that reading to zone 2 (3 stops less), and you meter the brightest highlight where you will just want textured white (Zone 8), and note down how many stops brighter that highlight is. If it is 7 stops, develop normally.

 

If it is more than 7 stops, note how much more (7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, also referred to as +.5, +1, +1.5 and +2). If it is less than 7 stops, note that down (-.5, -1, -1.5, -2).

 

Sheet film holders have little white rectangles where one can pencil in this info for each sheet - or you can use an official 1940 Ansel Adams Exposure Record Notebook (And Decoder Ring)

 

exposure record | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

Then develop that image according to the results from step 4.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Charlie Johnson]

Sorry. Wrong info on the lab.

 

http://www.photoimagimgwales.com

 

You have to dig around a bit for the mail order section.

[Cyril Jayant]

Hi

 

HP5+ always needs 400 it is not like XP2, it also needs a pro lab for development, you take more risks (of burning highlights) if you use 200.

 

XP2 is better at 200 or 100 than 400, and the mini labs can develop and print it. XP2 has more latitude then HP5+.

 

Developing your own monochrome (like HP5) is easy, but you need all the kit and spare time in evenings. People will jump up and down and tell you what developer they use.

 

ILFORD PHOTO - Developing Black & White Film

 

You can use bulk or cine 35mm if you have a changing bag or dark room.

 

Noel

 

Better not get confused about different films. Kodak Tri-x , Tmax and Ilford Fuji Agfa brands are B&W films. They can be named as B&W (classic) Silver halide films.

XP2 and the other special films are Chromogenic films and should be developed in colour development process as they are different.

 

They have different tolerance to the exposers. Ex. films have different tolerant latitude according to the brands and speed. When you use a film which has wider latitude your margin of error is less as it has a wider tolerance. So still you produce a printable negative. So while printing you have vast choice to get a pleasing print. Using high contrast developers to maximise the result , Manual zone manipulation, burning or dodging or zone developing or changing the contrast grade.etc.

 

So classic silver negatives are less effective (limited) for exposing than their indicated standard Asa rating, whereas the chromogenic are more tolerable in exposing in changed Asa than the standerd rated speed.

 

That is why you should know the basic. Waist some films, make some mistakes it is the best way to learn. But have to do more homework, recoded results will save your time in learning and understanding the basic more faster.

 

Don't let all these ,...F stop system , or zone system bother you. Buy a good book on those things and system and keep it handy. Start shooting and use the M6 camera on auto. In most of general photography M6 meter is perfect for exposing your film. But that depends on what film you are using. For me to find the best and general, film it has taken years. But I never failed in getting my correct exposed film.

 

...........

Edited July 7, 2011 by Cyril Jayant

[Michael Hiles]

BTW, do you have to shoot an entire roll of film at 200 asa or can you jump back and forth so to speak between 200 and 400?

 

Thanks.

 

Tony

Hi Tony,

 

You can expose each frame for anything between ASA 50 and 800. In fact Ilford states this in their fact sheet. What will happen is that you will get more or less dense negatives, and greater or finer sense of grain (50 produces finer grain). I always expose for 200 ASA - I never have to make pictures where I need to use very sensitive film and shoot at a 15th at 1.4. Since I find 200 optimum, I just stick with it.

 

In practice, if you were in a bar and the meter said 1.4 at 1/8th - you could do 1.4 at 1/30th, and get a reasonable picture. This would be the same as exposing for 800 ASA. You would get a thin negative that would be quite usable. using 1/8th would produce a better negative - but it sharpness would likely suffer.

 

As noted above, the colour cast happens when XP2 is printed on colour paper. 400CN does not have this problem because it has an orange mask like colour negative film.

 

I have no experience with Tri-X in Diafine - can't comment.

[thebarnman]

Tri-X @ 320 developed for 10% shorter time than "recommended"

 

There's a Tri-X album of mine here where you can judge for yourself whether that's suitable for your needs.

 

 

I was thinking of a way to use your method through dr5 for the same results you achieve.

 

Your method of shooting 400 at 320 is 20% less???

 

I've noticed dr5 recommends shooting Tri-X @ 320 iso for "normal." dr5 CHROME - Black and White slide / transparency process + THE ONLY RELIABLE SCALA PROCESSING WORLDWIDE

 

(if 20% less is correct...)

 

Using what you've recommended and trying it out with dr5, I would then shoot Tri-X at 20% less than 320 iso (normal) equaling 256 iso...20% less than the dr5 "normal" rating of 320 iso.

 

I would then simply ask dr5 to develop the Tri-X I shot at 256 iso at a 10% shorter time than his "normal" 320 iso development time?

[Michael Hiles]

Me again.

 

My experience is that generously exposed XP2 and 400CN (i.e. at 50) produce excellent darkroom prints, but do not scan well on my system. The scans from these thick negatives appear grainy, which is not the case in a silver print. Negatives at 200 ASA scan superbly.

 

I make the point because so many people scan everything (I do), and then make prints from the scans (I don't).

 

BTW - many practitioners over many years have advocated the thinest possible negatives - consistent with generous shadow detail. Exposing with an ASA that produces a density of 0.1 over film base+fog produces this optimum result. With XP2 and 400CN, this is 200 ASA using my equipment (2 good condition well adjusted M bodies and Leitz/Leica lenses). For any Leica with an accurate shutter, the result should be the same.

Edited July 8, 2011 by Michael Hiles

[atournas]

"Expose for the shadows..." etc. refers to the Zone System. The Zone System is simple to learn and use but cannot be taught in a few lines--sorry! You need a dedicated text and, unfortunately, most of them are too technical with no reason for being so. Even Adam's book which originates the System is not simple enough. The best book available, which covers the Zone System on practical terms for both film and digital cameras, is "The Practical Zone System," 4th edition, by Chris Johnson.

 

Anyway, one of the reasons Zone System cannot be readily applied is that it requires careful exposure metering of the reflected light with a spotmeter for at least two light values: that from the darkest shadow you, nevertheless, want to see details from on the final print, and that from the lightest areas you don't want them to "wash away white" on the paper. That may mean under- or over-developing the film by a carefully controlled length of time. The Zone System is the combination of all of them, not just exposing for the shadows.

 

The approach and methodology is completely different, if not reversed, for color film and for digital.

 

Paul

Edited July 9, 2011 by atournas

[giordano]

"Expose for the shadows..." etc. refers to the Zone System.

 

It's the other way round. The Zone System elaborates and formalises something that photographers had known long before.

 

The approach and methodology is completely different, if not reversed, for color film and for digital.

 

And for B&W reversal processing.

[thebarnman]

The approach and methodology is completely different, if not reversed, for color film and for digital.

 

Paul

 

 

 

And for B&W reversal processing.

 

 

 

Paul, I liked your explanation about the Zone system. It's pretty much what I remember from the photo classes I took. And your right, for some reason, the books go way into too much detail about it when honestly, it's pretty simple.

 

However, I'm curious how does one go about it with B&W reversal processing. I send much of my B&W negs to dr5 for reverse processing.

 

 

 

The only other thing about the Zone system I remember is lots of testing. Testing your camera, with a certain lens, with the type of developer one uses and the way which one develops (that can be different from the way someone else develops) and of course the light meter that person uses right down to the type of film that person uses. And then of course, the testing of the results of the developed film so adjustments can be made till the density results come back correct.

 

Then all that testing starts all over again if any part of that is changed.

[atournas]

Well, thebarnman's post correctly points out something critical regarding use of the Zone System, that of meticulous consistency during the entire procedure--exposing, developing, printing.

 

Since most posts in this thread directly refer to the Zone System, let me add one all-important application of the method, known as "previsualization." The photographer is offered the mechanism for "previewing" the desired final print of his/her photograph and thus acquiring command of what he/she is aiming at. Ansel Adam's prints are not results of luck!

 

Of course, in street and documentary photography, where Leica M excels, there is no time for using the Zone System. Just think of HCB or Robert Frank.

 

Paul

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Xmas]

Hi

 

No you dont have to be Adams or Weston to use the zone system techniques.

 

If you have a shadow you want some detail in you get close & point your Weston meter at the shadow and set the Westons 'U' marker at the value of needle reading, the Meter does the rest, no jiggery pokery, or book learning involved.

 

That resolves the question in title.

 

Westons are cheap.

 

The assumption is that it is a retained slver film, but this will also be valid for C41 mono or color...

 

If you are shooting nuc weapon assemble use POTA...

 

If you are (or plan to) wet printing dont use the C41 Kodak film, use the Fuji or Ilford near equivalents, the mask will make VC paper more difficult to print.

 

Noel