Your timing is perfect. Just got back from a workshop with Bruce Barnbarm at his home darkroom and studio. Learned so much about how to use the Zone System. While working in the darkroom we discussed your channel and how good it is. Thanks.
Wow, I am so jealous!!! And thank you, that made my day! I have seen pics of his darkroom but imagine it is something to see. Did you get to spend time shooting setting up shots etc... That is something I would love to see him do. Hopefully I can get to a workshop at some point to!
We got to go out and shoot, develop the negatives, do a portfolio review and print/reprint or images in the darkroom. A power outage for 2 days kept it interesting. Lots of stories from 60 years of shooting.
I took a photography major back in the 70's which was taught only in black white. We spent the first week or so calibrating the film, developing times, and paper. The process was to shoot an 18% gray card full frame on a complete (35mm) roll of Tri-X (exposed at ASA100 for minimal grain size and greater contrast range). Each exposure was a plus half stop from the initial lens-cap-on shot. Then develop the film such that each frame was a shade darker than the preceding, from clear film to dense black. After achieving that, print and develop a proof sheet until the print (on Agfa Brovira?) also showed the complete gray tonal range of the film. Of course all aspects of the developing process had to be consistent, including, chemical mixture, agitation of the film the can, and developing times. Until we had the film and paper calibrated we weren't allow to actually produce any photographs for the class. At that point, equipment calibrated, we could focus on seeing.
@@davidallen2952 I feel every one should do this at least once with their favorite film & developer. You can learn a lot and will help you keep things more controlled and consistent moving forward, Thanks!
At the risk of offending everyone... Most "zone system" videos are like a doctoral statistics class that mathematically explains how the color green is red and you've been wrong your whole life. What I got from this video: expose for the shadows (which I comprehend and you demonstrated); develop for the highlights (which I comprehend and you demonstrated); then go shoot images and see what happens. I still might've missed your point, but I comprehend expose for/develop for/go shoot images and see what happens. Thanks
Really was trying to take a very technical subject and make it easier to understand and implement. So thank you, I feel like I accomplished this by your comment!
@@Distphoto Its not a technical subject, is actually the opposite of technical. Its really just matching gray colors, what is technical about this? It's just terribly explained, trying to sound technical. Most of his book is a waste of time, repeating everything and going around with anecdotes that just make easy concepts complicated. Is not hard. You take a reading of an area, and think of what gray you want that area to look. The reading gives you middle gray, you look at the scale see how many stops your color is from middle gray, and adjust the exposure by that many stops. What is technical about this?
@@DanielPalacio-v1h I think it gets technical if you want it to be. Measuring film densities and matching them to you preferred printing paper/ developer is where it gets more technical. But it does not have to be like you say
@@DanielPalacio-v1h you are describing how a technical aspect is explained. The zone system is by definition technical but if explained in a digestible manner then it’s easy to understand just like math or photography. What’s really important to grasp is he was in an era when people wrote and spoke differently. Shakespeare today seems weird to comprehend but actually back then it was common, just like cockney here in the uk is now.
Guys, the light falling off onto the scene is the same all-over, the meter (spot, partial, center weighted) always "wants" to turn the scene into middle grey with any given exposure settings. The spot meter goes hand in hand with the zone system because tells us how far a given image area needs to be under/over exposed (from middle grey) to be accurately portraid. Forgetting that you're using film (asking exposing to the shadows), when you know which tones equate with a given under/over exposure you'll "always" will exposure correctly. This video is good to translate film exposure to dark room printing.
There aren't many You Tube photography videos on exposure which aren't complete nonsense. This is one of the few. Some people might find it hard to grasp, but that will be because they have swallowed the nonsense - which entails thinking that 'exposure' means how dark or light the final photo looks. It makes it impossible to comprehend videos like this which are all about separate stages of exposing, developing and printing. For those that find it too technical, it's well worth going through and thinking about. Great video.
Thank you, I think it gets confusing because it is the norm to just adjust a digital images brightness and contrast with a slide even on our phones. So the negative film process can take some thinking like you said to really wrap your head around what is happening.
Really good video with great explanations. Enjoying the content now that I'm shooting more film. Look forward to applying some of these tips on my 120 film shoots.
Great video. The advice to know your materials - stick to one film and one developer while you're learning this stuff - is the most important I think. I'm teaching my 11 year old daughter how to shoot, develop and print film at the moment, and it's all being done with HP5+, Xtol and Ilford MG V. She's learning fast
I agree. Though it can be so hard to do. You have to be committed. So easy to get distracted by all the great options out there. If I had to pick one film for all formats and everything. I think it would be HP5. Just so easy to work with! Awesome that your daughter is printing! My daughter is now 11 and we made a pinhole camera and print for her science project at school. So cool to see them grasp the process. Though she would rather be doing Gymnastics at the moment… Appreciate the feedback!
Well done, Matthew, respecting your intention as an introductory piece. I think the one thing I would add is simply a note, that it is called the Zone System, not the Value System. That is, if we place a continuous tone-gradient from black to white above or below the step tablet of zones you showed, we see that what is represented by the 10 zones (originally it was 9, 9 being pure white) is actually that continuum: Each zone, on the tablet, is a textureless, single gray value (or "brightness"), even though we speak of Zones II - VIII as having (at least some) texture, which necessarily means a *range* of values. We may use a 1-degree angle-of-acceptance meter, but anytime we include the texture of a surface within that tiny circle, our reading is in fact an average of those various included values. I mention this because it's not uncommon for students to believe at first that only a specific value can be a Zone IV or a Zone VIII, while, in the real world, a subject can be anywhere within that one-stop range, a "low" or a high Zone VI, for instance. As you said, avoid fixating on absolute exactitude. And, as we grow more experienced with subject readings, we recognize that the degree to which texture is or is not revealed in, say, a "low Zone III" area, depends on the range of values within that averaged area, small as it may be.
Thanks Phillip, Great info and point about the metered area even with a spot meter typically being an average of different tones in the scene. I sometimes find this to be the hardest to interpret and place where I want them!
@@Distphoto Yes. For those new to this: Where a high range of values exists in the texture included in the metered area, as in any averaged reading, the high values can lead one to underexpose, pushing low-medium and lower values toward (or past) the film's sensitivity threshold, i.e., no printable texture.
I used the Zone System for my B&W photography from 1971 to 1990, worked as a pro photographer accomplish the same goals with lighting on color prints and then in 1974 went to work in the National Geographic photo lab were one of my jobs was to reproduce B&W and color photos and art for printing in the NGS publications which led me into a career managing magazine production and printing and teaching in college classrooms and since 1994 here in the ether. What made Adams’ approach different that Kodak’ technically was his insistence on making all prints on #2 contrast grade paper which is what necessitated ‘bespoke’ development of each negative based on the contrast of the lighting in the scene. For starters it was an approach only practical for sheet film which meant lugging around at minimum a 4x5 camera and tripod. The Kodak approach was to always develop the film to make a perfect full range print of a cross-lit sunny outdoor scene on the same #2 the same way Adams did for his ‘baseline’ normal scene contrast, but for scenes with less contrast in the lighting -cloudy, overcast, open shade-one would simply read the density range of the negative between darkest shadows and brightest highlight and pick a paper grade from 1 to 4 which would fit that negative equally perfectly to the range of the paper. By the 1970s Kodak scientists had figured out a way to change the contrast of the paper with different color light: Yellow filtration in the enlarger for very contrasty negatives and various amounts of magenta filtration for normal (sunny cross light) and lower contrast lighting either using a set of gel filters Kodak sold, or if having a color head on one’s enlarger as I did in my home darkroom just ‘dialing’ it in to match any negative range. Exposure of B&W negative film wasn’t as critical as Adams made it out to be. In fact it is possible to over-expose by 2-3 stops and still made a full range print from the negative. But precisely and ‘systematically’ controlling exposure up-front as Adams did was make the process of print making much simpler. Adams defined black voids like a cave as “Zone / Print Value 0” which on the print was maximum black. He wanted “Zone 0” areas to be reproduced with the clear base of the film so the border on a print created by enlarging the negative carrier with a file would be black with any “Zone 0” areas in the scene like the inside of a cave with “Zone 1 - first hint of shape in shadows” being recorded on the negative with a very slight density and reproduced as “Print Value 1”; a shade of dark gray just above max black. Given the metering tools available to Adams when he developed the system the most consistent way to control exposure that precisely was to place a Kodak 18% gray card in direct sun and meter it with a Weston meter also calibrated for 18% reflectance, which at the time was considered the average reflectance of a typical ROT composed 1/3 sky - 2/3 land outdoor photo. The first test we did with zone system was to shoot at the rated film speed the increments 10% higher of a subject standing in direct sun wearing white and black clothing to find the “true” film speed which would expose Zone 0 voids in the shaded folds of the black clothing on the clear base and the Zone 1 (shape) and Zone 2 (visible texture) areas on the black clothing optimally on negative and print. Typically this required using other than the rated speed on the meter when measuring the 18% card. I was using a Honeywell-Pentax 1° spot meter in 1971 and realized I could skip the gray card setting of exposure by simply aiming the meter at a Zone 1 shadow area where I wanted the first hint of detail on negative and print and just adjusting the meter dial the same way to obtain it. The only difference was the amount the rated fill needed to be change to shift the meter calibration point its standard 18% to 5% or so a Zone 1 shadow area reflected. That was my first ‘hack’ of Adams system. My second change, again made possible by the spot meter, was being able precisely determine in EV (1-stop intervals) what the Zone 1 to Zone 9 solid non-specular white was and with that knowledge as a bit of testing with a densitometer what Polycontrast filtration was needed to fit any range of lighting to the range of the paper perfectly with roll film developed for ‘Normal’ sunny scene. Sunny scenes were pretty much a no-brainer because the negative development time was selected based in fitting them on #2 grade paper. Having and enlarging meter allowed me to very easily and precisely expose for max black Zone 0 on the boarder and voids and determine the range to the Zone 9 non-specular highlights to select yellow or magenta filtration. I also determined the ‘bespoke’ negative development time for printing any EV range on #2 paper as Adams did for comparison if I shot an entire roll of film with my Mamiya 645 medium format camera in the same EV range lighting. The idea Adams espoused of shifting tonal values in the mid-tones during exposure was technically flawed because shifting exposure in the mid-tones also will result in the same shift in highlights and shadow just as with a digital sensor. The goal at exposure with B&W negative film is the time tested axiom of “Expose for detail in the shadows then develop the negative for detail in the highlights ON THE PRINT. What Adams did however do brilliantly before others was to exploit the way COLOR FILTERS on the lens at capture change the contrast of colors UNNATURAL ways. One of the things than makes Adams classic Yosemite shots so breathtaking and different is his used of a RED FILTER on the lens when taking the photo to darken the blue sky which make the focal point contrast more. After reading his books I added red, orange, yellow, green and blue filters to my bag of tricks for the same reason, but did not used then when doing photojournalism - that would be ‘cheating’ in that genre of photography. The first part of the Zone System was purely technical - fitting EV range of scene to the 3.1 density range of #2 print paper - with or without filters to change contrast of colors in the scene. The shifting of Zone V to Zone IV or VI was done under the enlarger SELECTIVELY with burning and dodging exposure. Adams would start with a ‘baseline” full range print that fit the range of the paper, then make a tissue overlap ‘map’ of where and how much to shift tonal values. Those ‘maps’ of selective edits allowed assistants to make identical prints for sale. That was the real ‘payoff’ for all the up-front control of the process to the point of fitting scene range to #2 print paper in no-brainer fashion 😊 What B&W film and print making lacked is the ability to make GLOBAL (everywhere) mid-tone shifts which we now take for granted in LEVELS and CURVES in digital editing programs. LEVELS is based on the analog method I used at National Geographic to adjust contrast when making halfones and color separations with contact screens and litho film. Three separate exposures were made: Main exposure of print with screen on over litho film, ‘flash’ to extend the tonal range in the shadows done with just the screen over the film with lamp on ceiling, them a “bump’ exposure of print with the screen removed to shift the highlights and mid-tones. It was complicated by I figured out a way to predict how shift the exposures using the same systematic approach I’d learned from the Zone System. The creative editing capabilities offered by today’s digital editing software (I now use Affinity Photo 2) far exceed anything possible with film and digital sensors have reached the point they can record a sunny crosslit scene with detail everywhere.
there is one other option for zone system, in 120 , that is to use the 205FCC and its zone mode, with contrast control knob (on the mag), to set +1/+2/-1/-2 aka the amount of exp. compensation required for an N-1 or N+1 development.
@@Distphoto yes, if you look in the manual, as it is, it describes a basic way of using it, and esp. since this has a 'spot meter' built in, and has lens /film mag connections, so you set asa on the mag, and f stop on the lens, the contacts send this info to the meter, so everything works, and the meter is a +/- 1/12 EV accurate, according to manual and RUclips videos, the electronics even offer a flash meter, well worth investigating.
Thank you. I use Pentax gear. You recommend the Pentax spot meter over the Soligor Sensor II? I’m thinking about getting one or the other. Right now I use a phone app or my Pentax K-3 Mark iii Monochrome as a spot sensor.
the zone system is a waste of material and time and even adams himself was often unable to really make it work but it did not matter much because he was a master in the darkroom with a clear creative vision. moonrise over hernandez is a prime example. but his base idea is still relevant you need to know how your setup, camera, light-meter, film, developer…behaves if you want to make better exposures. but whether you call exposure steps zones or stops does not matter. so the most important tool for film photography in my view is still a simple grey card not a digital one but the good old kodak 0.7 card as it helps to determine your real film speed and other characteristics. but when you understand the relation between exposure and desired film density the zone system does not over anything useful, this is also the reason why it was never relevant in professional photography and almost all iconic bw images where made without it.
Summary, take a reading of the darkest shadow, and decide if you want to underexpose by 1 stop adequate detail, 2 stops almost litte detail, 3 no details, 4 full black. This books are so outdated, so much data for so little information why do you still recommend this?. 16 minutes to explain something you can explain in 2 minutes if you use a proper light-meter that gives you aperture & shutter speed.
Spent 16 minutes for the people who do not understand it. You clearly do but for a beginner this can be really hard to understand. One more thing is exposure is just half the equation. Knowing what your final print density is the endgame and there are quite a few variables, so it is by nature a bit complicated The books are still an invaluable resource to anyone wishing to print there pictures in a darkroom. We have an easier time today but the books lay the best foundation, and that is why I would recommend them. Outdated? Very few printers today are capable of printing how Ansel did… might be worth a look at how he made his negatives.
Bruce’s book ROCKS. His explanation of placing zone 4 as the base shadow is illuminating. I try to share it, but people just want to “pull”. I’m sure your experience was incredible. 😊
Sorry but this is no the zone sytem, you are just using the "zones". The zone system uses a densitometer and need a few rolls of film to "calibrate" a film/developer combo.
I hear what you are saying… However you can calibrate your materials in many ways. You do not need a densitometer or anything complicated. You can simply use your own darkroom paper. Which is potentially more useful and accurate for what you are printing. I can think of several ways to get great results with this… one way is to test and plot and test some more. Making a video on this would get lost and be to technical for most. This was meant to help people understand it better. I also would argue that using the zones basically is the Zone System. How you do it has always been open for debate. Even by Ansel Adams
Mr perez please move forward to create the ultimate perfect and eternal Zone System Channel where you can enlighten the world with your unique and once in a lifetime knowledge so we mortals can take a sip of your holy grail of knowledge……..👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
he is right somehow, but it would need more videos about how to correctly test and explain also f-stop printings. Pictorial Planet channel has great videos about it.
Your timing is perfect. Just got back from a workshop with Bruce Barnbarm at his home darkroom and studio. Learned so much about how to use the Zone System.
While working in the darkroom we discussed your channel and how good it is. Thanks.
Wow, I am so jealous!!! And thank you, that made my day! I have seen pics of his darkroom but imagine it is something to see.
Did you get to spend time shooting setting up shots etc... That is something I would love to see him do. Hopefully I can get to a workshop at some point to!
We got to go out and shoot, develop the negatives, do a portfolio review and print/reprint or images in the darkroom. A power outage for 2 days kept it interesting. Lots of stories from 60 years of shooting.
I took a photography major back in the 70's which was taught only in black white. We spent the first week or so calibrating the film, developing times, and paper. The process was to shoot an 18% gray card full frame on a complete (35mm) roll of Tri-X (exposed at ASA100 for minimal grain size and greater contrast range). Each exposure was a plus half stop from the initial lens-cap-on shot. Then develop the film such that each frame was a shade darker than the preceding, from clear film to dense black. After achieving that, print and develop a proof sheet until the print (on Agfa Brovira?) also showed the complete gray tonal range of the film. Of course all aspects of the developing process had to be consistent, including, chemical mixture, agitation of the film the can, and developing times. Until we had the film and paper calibrated we weren't allow to actually produce any photographs for the class. At that point, equipment calibrated, we could focus on seeing.
@@davidallen2952 I feel every one should do this at least once with their favorite film & developer. You can learn a lot and will help you keep things more controlled and consistent moving forward, Thanks!
At the risk of offending everyone... Most "zone system" videos are like a doctoral statistics class that mathematically explains how the color green is red and you've been wrong your whole life. What I got from this video: expose for the shadows (which I comprehend and you demonstrated); develop for the highlights (which I comprehend and you demonstrated); then go shoot images and see what happens. I still might've missed your point, but I comprehend expose for/develop for/go shoot images and see what happens. Thanks
Really was trying to take a very technical subject and make it easier to understand and implement. So thank you, I feel like I accomplished this by your comment!
@@Distphoto Its not a technical subject, is actually the opposite of technical. Its really just matching gray colors, what is technical about this? It's just terribly explained, trying to sound technical. Most of his book is a waste of time, repeating everything and going around with anecdotes that just make easy concepts complicated. Is not hard. You take a reading of an area, and think of what gray you want that area to look. The reading gives you middle gray, you look at the scale see how many stops your color is from middle gray, and adjust the exposure by that many stops. What is technical about this?
@@DanielPalacio-v1h I think it gets technical if you want it to be. Measuring film densities and matching them to you preferred printing paper/ developer is where it gets more technical. But it does not have to be like you say
I’m really pleased you are so self-aware.
@@DanielPalacio-v1h you are describing how a technical aspect is explained.
The zone system is by definition technical but if explained in a digestible manner then it’s easy to understand just like math or photography.
What’s really important to grasp is he was in an era when people wrote and spoke differently. Shakespeare today seems weird to comprehend but actually back then it was common, just like cockney here in the uk is now.
Whoa🤯 - I finally get it! I now understand what I need to do to get better negatives. Amazed!
Very cool!
Guys, the light falling off onto the scene is the same all-over, the meter (spot, partial, center weighted) always "wants" to turn the scene into middle grey with any given exposure settings. The spot meter goes hand in hand with the zone system because tells us how far a given image area needs to be under/over exposed (from middle grey) to be accurately portraid. Forgetting that you're using film (asking exposing to the shadows), when you know which tones equate with a given under/over exposure you'll "always" will exposure correctly. This video is good to translate film exposure to dark room printing.
You are natural born teacher 👏👏👏🙌👌🏻
Thanks a lot 😊 Appreciate the feedback!
There aren't many You Tube photography videos on exposure which aren't complete nonsense. This is one of the few. Some people might find it hard to grasp, but that will be because they have swallowed the nonsense - which entails thinking that 'exposure' means how dark or light the final photo looks. It makes it impossible to comprehend videos like this which are all about separate stages of exposing, developing and printing. For those that find it too technical, it's well worth going through and thinking about. Great video.
Thank you, I think it gets confusing because it is the norm to just adjust a digital images brightness and contrast with a slide even on our phones. So the negative film process can take some thinking like you said to really wrap your head around what is happening.
A clear, concise, informative tutorial. And very much appreciated. Cheers
Thank you!
This finally makes sense for me now. The best video so far on this subject. Thanks a lot!!!
@@marlonsouza9224 Glad it helped, you’re welcome!
Really good video with great explanations. Enjoying the content now that I'm shooting more film. Look forward to applying some of these tips on my 120 film shoots.
@@LarryManiccia Thanks Larry, hope they help!
This is such useful information, thanks so much
Great video. The advice to know your materials - stick to one film and one developer while you're learning this stuff - is the most important I think. I'm teaching my 11 year old daughter how to shoot, develop and print film at the moment, and it's all being done with HP5+, Xtol and Ilford MG V. She's learning fast
I agree. Though it can be so hard to do. You have to be committed. So easy to get distracted by all the great options out there.
If I had to pick one film for all formats and everything. I think it would be HP5. Just so easy to work with!
Awesome that your daughter is printing! My daughter is now 11 and we made a pinhole camera and print for her science project at school. So cool to see them grasp the process. Though she would rather be doing Gymnastics at the moment…
Appreciate the feedback!
Well done, Matthew, respecting your intention as an introductory piece. I think the one thing I would add is simply a note, that it is called the Zone System, not the Value System. That is, if we place a continuous tone-gradient from black to white above or below the step tablet of zones you showed, we see that what is represented by the 10 zones (originally it was 9, 9 being pure white) is actually that continuum: Each zone, on the tablet, is a textureless, single gray value (or "brightness"), even though we speak of Zones II - VIII as having (at least some) texture, which necessarily means a *range* of values. We may use a 1-degree angle-of-acceptance meter, but anytime we include the texture of a surface within that tiny circle, our reading is in fact an average of those various included values.
I mention this because it's not uncommon for students to believe at first that only a specific value can be a Zone IV or a Zone VIII, while, in the real world, a subject can be anywhere within that one-stop range, a "low" or a high Zone VI, for instance. As you said, avoid fixating on absolute exactitude. And, as we grow more experienced with subject readings, we recognize that the degree to which texture is or is not revealed in, say, a "low Zone III" area, depends on the range of values within that averaged area, small as it may be.
Thanks Phillip, Great info and point about the metered area even with a spot meter typically being an average of different tones in the scene. I sometimes find this to be the hardest to interpret and place where I want them!
@@Distphoto Yes. For those new to this: Where a high range of values exists in the texture included in the metered area, as in any averaged reading, the high values can lead one to underexpose, pushing low-medium and lower values toward (or past) the film's sensitivity threshold, i.e., no printable texture.
Excellent tutorial,great!
Thank you for the feedback! Greatly appreciated 👍
I used the Zone System for my B&W photography from 1971 to 1990, worked as a pro photographer accomplish the same goals with lighting on color prints and then in 1974 went to work in the National Geographic photo lab were one of my jobs was to reproduce B&W and color photos and art for printing in the NGS publications which led me into a career managing magazine production and printing and teaching in college classrooms and since 1994 here in the ether.
What made Adams’ approach different that Kodak’ technically was his insistence on making all prints on #2 contrast grade paper which is what necessitated ‘bespoke’ development of each negative based on the contrast of the lighting in the scene. For starters it was an approach only practical for sheet film which meant lugging around at minimum a 4x5 camera and tripod.
The Kodak approach was to always develop the film to make a perfect full range print of a cross-lit sunny outdoor scene on the same #2 the same way Adams did for his ‘baseline’ normal scene contrast, but for scenes with less contrast in the lighting -cloudy, overcast, open shade-one would simply read the density range of the negative between darkest shadows and brightest highlight and pick a paper grade from 1 to 4 which would fit that negative equally perfectly to the range of the paper.
By the 1970s Kodak scientists had figured out a way to change the contrast of the paper with different color light: Yellow filtration in the enlarger for very contrasty negatives and various amounts of magenta filtration for normal (sunny cross light) and lower contrast lighting either using a set of gel filters Kodak sold, or if having a color head on one’s enlarger as I did in my home darkroom just ‘dialing’ it in to match any negative range.
Exposure of B&W negative film wasn’t as critical as Adams made it out to be. In fact it is possible to over-expose by 2-3 stops and still made a full range print from the negative. But precisely and ‘systematically’ controlling exposure up-front as Adams did was make the process of print making much simpler.
Adams defined black voids like a cave as “Zone / Print Value 0” which on the print was maximum black. He wanted “Zone 0” areas to be reproduced with the clear base of the film so the border on a print created by enlarging the negative carrier with a file would be black with any “Zone 0” areas in the scene like the inside of a cave with “Zone 1 - first hint of shape in shadows” being recorded on the negative with a very slight density and reproduced as “Print Value 1”; a shade of dark gray just above max black.
Given the metering tools available to Adams when he developed the system the most consistent way to control exposure that precisely was to place a Kodak 18% gray card in direct sun and meter it with a Weston meter also calibrated for 18% reflectance, which at the time was considered the average reflectance of a typical ROT composed 1/3 sky - 2/3 land outdoor photo. The first test we did with zone system was to shoot at the rated film speed the increments 10% higher of a subject standing in direct sun wearing white and black clothing to find the “true” film speed which would expose Zone 0 voids in the shaded folds of the black clothing on the clear base and the Zone 1 (shape) and Zone 2 (visible texture) areas on the black clothing optimally on negative and print. Typically this required using other than the rated speed on the meter when measuring the 18% card.
I was using a Honeywell-Pentax 1° spot meter in 1971 and realized I could skip the gray card setting of exposure by simply aiming the meter at a Zone 1 shadow area where I wanted the first hint of detail on negative and print and just adjusting the meter dial the same way to obtain it. The only difference was the amount the rated fill needed to be change to shift the meter calibration point its standard 18% to 5% or so a Zone 1 shadow area reflected. That was my first ‘hack’ of Adams system.
My second change, again made possible by the spot meter, was being able precisely determine in EV (1-stop intervals) what the Zone 1 to Zone 9 solid non-specular white was and with that knowledge as a bit of testing with a densitometer what Polycontrast filtration was needed to fit any range of lighting to the range of the paper perfectly with roll film developed for ‘Normal’ sunny scene. Sunny scenes were pretty much a no-brainer because the negative development time was selected based in fitting them on #2 grade paper. Having and enlarging meter allowed me to very easily and precisely expose for max black Zone 0 on the boarder and voids and determine the range to the Zone 9 non-specular highlights to select yellow or magenta filtration. I also determined the ‘bespoke’ negative development time for printing any EV range on #2 paper as Adams did for comparison if I shot an entire roll of film with my Mamiya 645 medium format camera in the same EV range lighting.
The idea Adams espoused of shifting tonal values in the mid-tones during exposure was technically flawed because shifting exposure in the mid-tones also will result in the same shift in highlights and shadow just as with a digital sensor. The goal at exposure with B&W negative film is the time tested axiom of “Expose for detail in the shadows then develop the negative for detail in the highlights ON THE PRINT.
What Adams did however do brilliantly before others was to exploit the way COLOR FILTERS on the lens at capture change the contrast of colors UNNATURAL ways. One of the things than makes Adams classic Yosemite shots so breathtaking and different is his used of a RED FILTER on the lens when taking the photo to darken the blue sky which make the focal point contrast more. After reading his books I added red, orange, yellow, green and blue filters to my bag of tricks for the same reason, but did not used then when doing photojournalism - that would be ‘cheating’ in that genre of photography.
The first part of the Zone System was purely technical - fitting EV range of scene to the 3.1 density range of #2 print paper - with or without filters to change contrast of colors in the scene. The shifting of Zone V to Zone IV or VI was done under the enlarger SELECTIVELY with burning and dodging exposure. Adams would start with a ‘baseline” full range print that fit the range of the paper, then make a tissue overlap ‘map’ of where and how much to shift tonal values. Those ‘maps’ of selective edits allowed assistants to make identical prints for sale. That was the real ‘payoff’ for all the up-front control of the process to the point of fitting scene range to #2 print paper in no-brainer fashion 😊
What B&W film and print making lacked is the ability to make GLOBAL (everywhere) mid-tone shifts which we now take for granted in LEVELS and CURVES in digital editing programs. LEVELS is based on the analog method I used at National Geographic to adjust contrast when making halfones and color separations with contact screens and litho film. Three separate exposures were made: Main exposure of print with screen on over litho film, ‘flash’ to extend the tonal range in the shadows done with just the screen over the film with lamp on ceiling, them a “bump’ exposure of print with the screen removed to shift the highlights and mid-tones. It was complicated by I figured out a way to predict how shift the exposures using the same systematic approach I’d learned from the Zone System.
The creative editing capabilities offered by today’s digital editing software (I now use Affinity Photo 2) far exceed anything possible with film and digital sensors have reached the point they can record a sunny crosslit scene with detail everywhere.
so in the example given, bringing zone 9 down to zone 8 is essentially an N-1 development?
Best explanation in a long time. Thank you!
Have you read or heard of the book Zone Systemizer, by John J. Dowell & Richard D. Zakia?
Thank you!, no I have not but will look into it!
I wish Ansel lived in Australia - in the Southern Hemisphere - I wonder how different his objectivity (of specular light) would be...
there is one other option for zone system, in 120 , that is to use the 205FCC and its zone mode, with contrast control knob (on the mag), to set +1/+2/-1/-2 aka the amount of exp. compensation required for an N-1 or N+1 development.
I have not heard of this... sounds interesting!
@@Distphoto yes, if you look in the manual, as it is, it describes a basic way of using it, and esp. since this has a 'spot meter' built in, and has lens /film mag connections, so you set asa on the mag, and f stop on the lens, the contacts send this info to the meter, so everything works, and the meter is a +/- 1/12 EV accurate, according to manual and RUclips videos, the electronics even offer a flash meter, well worth investigating.
Great content and tips, just avoid the constant flash on your video
Noted, thanks!
Which light meter is that?
@@scottboyan I use a Pentax digital spot meter. Would not want to shoot large format without it.
Thank you.
I use Pentax gear.
You recommend the Pentax spot meter over the Soligor Sensor II? I’m thinking about getting one or the other.
Right now I use a phone app or my Pentax K-3 Mark iii Monochrome as a spot sensor.
I'm sorry, but did you say "foilage" at 5:22 😆?
@@ParhelionMedia yup, that’s what the book says.
@@Distphoto i before l ? Like tin foil? Or like leaves on trees...? ruclips.net/video/Mqe8z0GmkXo/видео.htmlsi=zQEVW-owzKQ5_Z-r
the zone system is a waste of material and time and even adams himself was often unable to really make it work but it did not matter much because he was a master in the darkroom with a clear creative vision. moonrise over hernandez is a prime example. but his base idea is still relevant you need to know how your setup, camera, light-meter, film, developer…behaves if you want to make better exposures. but whether you call exposure steps zones or stops does not matter. so the most important tool for film photography in my view is still a simple grey card not a digital one but the good old kodak 0.7 card as it helps to determine your real film speed and other characteristics. but when you understand the relation between exposure and desired film density the zone system does not over anything useful, this is also the reason why it was never relevant in professional photography and almost all iconic bw images where made without it.
🙏🙏🙏🙏💙💙💙💙💙👍👍👍👍👍
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Summary, take a reading of the darkest shadow, and decide if you want to underexpose by 1 stop adequate detail, 2 stops almost litte detail, 3 no details, 4 full black. This books are so outdated, so much data for so little information why do you still recommend this?. 16 minutes to explain something you can explain in 2 minutes if you use a proper light-meter that gives you aperture & shutter speed.
Spent 16 minutes for the people who do not understand it. You clearly do but for a beginner this can be really hard to understand.
One more thing is exposure is just half the equation. Knowing what your final print density is the endgame and there are quite a few variables, so it is by nature a bit complicated
The books are still an invaluable resource to anyone wishing to print there pictures in a darkroom. We have an easier time today but the books lay the best foundation, and that is why I would recommend them.
Outdated? Very few printers today are capable of printing how Ansel did… might be worth a look at how he made his negatives.
Bruce’s book ROCKS. His explanation of placing zone 4 as the base shadow is illuminating. I try to share it, but people just want to “pull”.
I’m sure your experience was incredible. 😊
Sorry but this is no the zone sytem, you are just using the "zones". The zone system uses a densitometer and need a few rolls of film to "calibrate" a film/developer combo.
I hear what you are saying… However you can calibrate your materials in many ways. You do not need a densitometer or anything complicated. You can simply use your own darkroom paper. Which is potentially more useful and accurate for what you are printing. I can think of several ways to get great results with this… one way is to test and plot and test some more. Making a video on this would get lost and be to technical for most. This was meant to help people understand it better.
I also would argue that using the zones basically is the Zone System. How you do it has always been open for debate. Even by Ansel Adams
Mr perez please move forward to create the ultimate perfect and eternal Zone System Channel where you can enlighten the world with your unique and once in a lifetime knowledge so we mortals can take a sip of your holy grail of knowledge……..👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
he is right somehow, but it would need more videos about how to correctly test and explain also f-stop printings. Pictorial Planet channel has great videos about it.
You should get to the point sooner in your video.
Ok