How I am Spot Metering my scenes for better looking negatives.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ก.พ. 2021
- Like this video? Want to buy me a coffee or a roll of film or generally just support the channel?
Now you can. Cheers!
www.buymeacoffee.com/SFLaB
Jessies Wax Melts
Instagram
@madeinwaxmelts
QUICK LINKS
SFLaB Hoodies & Merch
/ @shootfilmlikeaboss
SFLaB BEGINNERS GUIDE TO FILM PHOTOGRAPHY & DARKROOM
payhip.com/b/RtMY
JOIN SFLaB TH-cam COMMUNITY MEMBERS AREA
/ @shootfilmlikeaboss
SUPPORT MY CHANNEL ON PATREON
/ shootfilmlikeaboss
ORIGINAL PRINTS FOR SALE
www.etsy.com/uk/shop/shootfil...
THE SFLaB WEBSITE
www.rogerlowe.co.uk
FACEBOOK
/ shootfilmlikeaboss
INSTAGRAM
/ shootfilmlikeaboss
ABOUT THIS VIDEO
In this video I explore spot metering for shadows and developing for highlights.
EQUIPMENT USED
CAMERA - Mamiya RZ67
FILM - Ilford HP5
DEVELOPER -
STOP & FIX - Fotospeed
ENLARGER - DURST M605
PAPER - Kentmere VC Select
DEVELOPER - Ilford MG
STOP & FIX - FOTOSPEED
PRODUCTION GEAR
CANON 6D, GOPRO 7 BLACK, TASCAM DR10L MIC, SENHEISSER SHOTGUN MIC,
NEEWER LED PANELS, GVM COLOUR PANELS,
Editing - FCP, PHOTOSHOP, LIGHTROOM
ABOUT MY VIDEOS
If my videos inspire, create ideas and help others in film photography and darkroom work then it's worth making them.
I always welcome comments that are useful towards the video subject that will help others understand the process within.
Keep shooting and thanks for watching.
MUSIC CREDITING
TH-cam Studio Music - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
Hey I really admire your passion and how much you love to share what you do. I just want to share my bit: you did right but only addressed the first half of process. So let's go by steps!:
1) You expose for the darkest areas where you want to save some details. As we know the shadows end up pretty thin on film and below a given density all details are lost. So you did right, point your spot meter on the darkest area for which you anyway want to save some details, do a reading (say f5.6@1/15) and close a couple of stops (say you end up with f5.6@1/60), this should put your darkest spot in zone 3, the first density zone where details are caught on film
2) now you have to "develop for the highlights", which basically means finding the right development in order to save details in the highlights as well. For this it is crucial that you understand the difference between "place" and "fall". In step 1 you correctly "place" the darkest area in zone 3, determining the right exposure set (f5.6@1/60), this means that all areas where you actually read f5.6@1/60 with your spot meter will "fall" in zone 5 (remember, your spot meter always read mid-grey), all areas where you read f5.6@1/250 will "fall" in zone 7 and all areas where you read f5.6@1/500 will fall in zone 8. Highlights are much less problematic to render than shadows but anyway I usually don't want anything meaningful in my frame to "fall" beyond zone 8. So, say you want to save the details in the shadows but save also the details in a beautiful cloud in the sky, you take a reading of the cloud so to know where it will fall with a standard development time. Say you read f5.6@1/500, this means it will fall in zone 8, still perfectly printable. Say you read f5.6@1/1000, it will fall in zone 9 respecting standard development time, so you under-develop to shrink a bit the density range and get the cloud in zone 8. Suppose it is a very dull day where you read f5.6@1/125 for the sky, in this case it will fall just in zone 6 and you could over-develop a bit to expand the density range and put the sky in zone 7.
The important bit to understand here is that development only controls the mid and especially the highlights, the shadows are not or very little affected by changes in the development process. This means that any shadow that is not recorded at exposure time is lost.
To really follow this method you should expose single sheets of film and register for each one the right development for the highlights (N, or N+1 or N-1,...). This is what Ansel Adams did. With a medium format camera like yours you could still achieve a good result using more backs.
All this is explained in great details in the Adams book "The Negative".
If you don't meter your highlights, you basically just "expose for the shadows" which is anyhow all you can do if you just have one back, at least you save your details there, you can still somehow control your highlights during the print process.
Sorry for the long post, I hope it is of some help. Anyway again a great video of yours, keep shooting like a boss!
Thanks for this input. You're right. I knew my shadows were safe in development and my theory of pulling development did work to a degree as I tested a few frames of fp4 in a 35mm camera Normal, N-1 and N-2. It took a while and I found N-2 gave best results. Back to the drawing board here for me ha ha. Thanks for your detailed input.
That was really well written. I'll print this so I can read it again.
I really must get the AA book as it seems to be the best out there - after-all, he did invent the system :)
Nice to see darkroom printing having a resurgence. What I do for roll film where all the shots have the same development and can’t be developed individually based on the scene is to do stand development which restrains over developing the hilight. You can also use a pyrocat staining developer which likewise restrains hilight development. Both of these are easy to do and give great negatives.
@@michaellong9526 even just using rodinal at 1+50 will tame the highlights to a degree.
Why not just use a graduated filter. If the sky is 2 stops over in your light meter, that would be an overall 4 stop difference, then just put a 4 stop GND filter on and call it a day, develop as usual and your whole shot is an equal exposure.. Unless you're being very traditional with the photography.
Thanks everyone for you kind comments, encouraging words and wisdom. Much appreciated. Great community here with a mixed combined level of knowlwdge and experience. Awesome!
I learned the ZS from Adams books and used it for 20years. My day job in the 70s was working at the National Geographic photo lab and a side gig teaching photography so I understand the technical side of things better than the average bear 😊
The simplest way to “Expose for the Shadows” with a spot meter is do this test: spot meter Zone 2 - first texture - shadow in a crosslit sunny scene. Bracket by lowering the ISO setting on the meter about three stops lower which changes the meter calibration value from 18% gray to Zone 2; e.g. set meter to 50 if using ISO 400 film. Look at the shadow densities on the negatives and test prints then use the ISO of the frame with perfectly the Zone 0/ 1 / 2 exposed shadow from that point on.
Spot meters had not been invented when St. Ansel brought his grayscale stone tablet down from the mountain. He was forced to meter of an 18% card. The book then said to do the same bracket test adjusting the TRUE film speed and looking at neg and prints until the 0/1/2 shadows on them were optimal with just enough exposure to make the borders of the neg max. black on the print.
I quickly realized using a spot meter eliminated all the “interpret from Zone V” nonsense by simply changing the calibration value of the meter from 18%/Zone V to the darker Zone 2 by lowering ISO. It is also possible to shift calibration on most modern meters with a calibration adjustment of around -3 stops.
Zones ARE NOT f/stop they are tonal values on the print where 0 = max black obtained with min. enlarger exposure and 10 = white paper base WHICH IS ONLY USED ON THE PRINT TO REPRODUCE THE SPECULAR HIGHLIGHTS. Smooth white objects must be reproduced as Zone 9 light gray to preserve the PERCEPTION of 3D shape in the highlights.
For example shooting a white car the body of the car would be reproduced Zone 9 (light gray) and the paper base with no exposure / silver reproducing the Zone 10 reflections of the sun on the white hood. When you wrap your head around that you’ll understand what St. Ansel was trying to teach the masses who would wash out the highlights and illusion of 3D on prints by using the paper base to represent the white hood, in the process killing the speculars that create the perception of 3D in a 2D rendering.
Painters under stand this intutively. Water color painting is like photo prints where the paper base must be reserved for specular reflections. In oil and acrylic media dots of white paint are used (a trick that can be employed in photoshop to add fake 255 specular highlights in white objects reproduced at 245-250
With sheet film the EV range of the scene was used to know how long to develop the NEGATIVE to fit the range of the paper based on Adams’ goal of ALWAYS PRINTING ON #2 PAPER.
That bespoke development based on scene lighting conditions isn’t practical on roll film but a reading the EV range from Z2 TO Z9 can be used to know in advance what Polycontrast filtering will be needed when printing, what I did most of the time using my color enlarger head to dial in the exact Yellow/Magenta CC values.
If scanning your negatives develop negatives from a clear crosslit sunny day to fit its range just as Adams defined his NORMAL development to match that sunny scene to #2 grade paper. As a baseline for the scanner find the development time which will fit a cross-lit sunny scene onto the histogram of the scan in Photoshop. Then for lighting with less contrast - cloudy, overcast, etc. you can adjust the file from the scanner with a Levels or Curves adjustment.
After getting into the habit of metering Zone 2 detail then Zone 9 non specular white highlights you will be able to realize the EV ranges just by the lighting and realize the exposures are about the same as predicted by the Sunny 16 (1/ISO @ f/16) rule and chart because the sun is consistent everywhere.
I doubt Adams actually had to meter to determine exposure and development time but made a ritual out of it to teach those who didn’t yet have that experience and sell books. He bracketed exposures and did a lot of dodging and burning on his prints to selectively change print value Zones after first using negative development to produce a full range from max. black to preserving the specular reflection on white objects.
It was a common practice to keep a yellow filter on the lens outdoors at all times because B&W is more sensitive to blue and near-UV than human vision so skies in photos without the filter would always wind up too light and overexposed compared to how they look by eye. Adams’ iconic photos of Yosemite with dark brooding skies making the highlighted rocks contrast more were the result of using a red, orange and yellow filters at capture. Green, yellow and blue were used to make foliage appear lighter than it actually was.
Zone System - multiple books (including all three of Ansel Adams) and websites later, with much experimentation, light meters, on camera and off. Conclusions - Ansel Adams was shooting large format, it records greater detail, it takes a singular shot in those lighting conditions and you develop that singular negative, try applying this to roll film and you are sunk, totally Titaniced, unless its the same scene on a grey day where the sky is a consistent grey. The zone system is a consistent sliding scale of the scene before you, you lighten the shadows, then you're lightening the sky as well, you darken the sky then you're darkening the shadows. The greater the light contrast in a scene the greater the chance of blowing out the sky and/or crushing the blacks. I think you've a better chance when shooting roll film by trying to average out your exposure by using a wider light meter setting across all shots on that roll.
Ansel Adams was a great photographer with a large format camera, but he was more an expert in darkroom jiggery-pokery than he was at producing a roll of well exposed 35mm film negatives.
Sorry if this is heresy and I've taken Ansel Adams' name in vain but I don't see how applying a singlular set of 'rules' to all types of photography and then scratching your head when it doesn't work makes much sense. Neither do I think Ansel Adams intended this to be the case, he kept well away from discussing roll film.
This was my conclusion too, after trying to apply the zone system in street photography. It’s simply impractical for me in changing light, with 36 exposure rolls, often shot over multiple days.
I’m pretty happy with just averaging each scene using the camera meter, and then developing in Rodinal 1+50 which seems to underdevelop the highlights to an extent.
Ansel also used his Hasselblad 6x6 on occasion, however I'm sure he casually used MF like we today use street cameras but in a manual operations of course. Still I'm sure he applied some zone system to his metering on his Hassy but I knowing his mastery of exposures and processing, there must be some secret sauce he's doing for smaller format exposures.
I don’t have current experience. Film was a hobby of mine in the early 70s. I’m currently in process of rehabbing my cameras studying Zones and collecting gear to develop film. Back in the day 1970 we just used settings that the new SLR meters said to use… and I was frustrated with flat negatives and “fixing it in the darkroom”. Current Zone research is explains my past frustrations.
My new strategy will be to bulk load “6” shot 35mm film cans. I’m hoping there will be enough film to get consistent results from the developer solutions. Yes it will waste film (from the heads n tails) but it will give me the developing flexibility that restricts a 36 exposure roll like what is being discussed. And probably no where near the waste in chemicals or paper I used to burn through trying to get contrast.
Plus I’m gonna drag my tripod all the time and not be afraid or shooting less than 1/30 sec.
There’s nothing like a properly exposed negative. Saves time, resources and is way more fun!
Does anyone else do this?
Thanks to the BOSS I’ve got new things to think about
There's a lot of things that go into making a print: The film you choose, the camera and lens, how you meter and expose the film, how long you develop the negative and which developer, the enlarger you use for exposing the print, the lens used, the paper used, how much you expose, dodging and burning, the chemicals, and probably more.
For starters, you can calibrate your camera and film on a test scene to get all 10 zones, and from there after testing various developing times you know what ISO to set for your film (not necessarily the box speed), and how long to develop the negative for (not necessarily the recommended time). For instance, you may shoot ISO 400 film at 200, and cut the development time in half to get a greater tonal range, including with a 35mm camera, so you get details in the shadows and details in the highlights at the same time.
Watch these videos:
Cody Mitchell on the Zone System:
th-cam.com/video/Mh3mkWMRpew/w-d-xo.html
Trangent (Will Agar) on Adjusting the Exposure and the Development of Your Film to Match the Contrast of Your Scene:
th-cam.com/video/OdpfRqDDZyw/w-d-xo.html
The Photography Minimalist discussion on the Zone System with Hans de Graaf
Part 1:
th-cam.com/video/ND3B50dTU-Y/w-d-xo.html
Part 2:
th-cam.com/video/_eiWF-mBwIc/w-d-xo.html
HAHAHAHA The Bionic Man reference... I had that doll and the Fembot and The Bionic Woman.
In the end, some who knows what he's been doing and saying on analogue photography. So many nonsense and half-arse photographers out there, who shoot film, have it developed in a lab, and then scan and retouch them on Photoshop; then pretend as the film shooter cool guys... oh my... I learnt in old days, but no longer shoot film. For the first time, I enjoyed someone's video on analogue photography while watching. All my memories and old knowledge were refreshed.
Another great video. Those "a-ha" moments of realisation are some of the most fun when shooting film. I was (slightly) familiar with the zone system as I bought and read The Negative by Ansel Adams back when I started learning about film. I understood it, but it seemed more suited to people who shot large format landscapes and needed to determine the various values of light in a scene to get optional exposure - not really applicable to snap shooters like me.
I can't afford a fancy spot meter, so I've spent most of my time learning how to eyeball the shadows to determine exposure via sunny 16. It works like a charm 90% of the time, but sometimes I get a whiteout in the sky, so I may experiment a little with reduced development times going forward.
Some really nice photos there. Thanks.
Thank you for the video and sharing your experience! From my experience, I try to do as much as possible already during the shooting. When the sky is overcast but bright it is hard to get details in the clouds. A ND grade filter to darken the sky helps wonders. Yes, a yellow 1 could help as well but affetcts the complete photograph. BTW, for anyone shooting digital as well, there it is called "Expose To The Right (ETTR)" and refers to shifting the exposure histogram curve to the right during the shot and then fixing it in lightroom. Doing it in the digital world first helped me understanding it in film photography later.
Nice prints ! Look much better than the scans. Great video, again !
Great work here on zone system. I will say you’re half way there. You’re right in exposing for the shadows and moving the zones from the metered to the zone you would like that tone placed in. The bit you’re missing Is to confirm the placement of your highlight. Black and white film has about 7 stops of dynamic range (prints about 5). If you’re highlight is 7 stops difference, no need for compensation. If it’s more than 7, less development is required. If it’s less than 7 and you want to add contrast, more development is required to push the highlight further.
I think. That's the missing link. Not measuring my highlights
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss yes sir. Your highlight tell you how to develop for the highlights and by how much. You’ll need to experiment with the dev time for each range n-3 to n+3.
@guscastillo - brilliant. Like Rog I've been measuring and adjusting for shadows.
So I guess that means if your Zone III exposure is f8 @ 1/8 then you should check to see if the highlight reads f8 @ 1/500 (which is seven stops faster). If so, then normal dev time is good. If it's f8 @ 1/1000 then you should cut dev time. That's how I read it. Right?
Best Zone System explanation on the net ever ! Congrats x 1000000000 !
Wow, thanks!
I learned plenty about light !!! Thank you. RS. Canada
Love the channel, remember the shadows develop in the first half of the time, so gives you half the time to adjust for your highlights. 10% or 20% normally does it for me on 8x10
This has been the video I’ve been waiting for. It’s always difficult to read these systems designed for large format single development systems, but more modern chemicals and emulsions mean us medium format roll guys can take advantage more than we thought.
It is Phillip. Some good info in the comments. I'll be persuing it more as we go along.
Hi, if your placing your exposure at zone 3 the problem is the highlight exposure could be 10 stops difference and you preferably want your highlights in zone 8 or 9, there is no zone 13, Graduated Filters solve this problem, Neutral Density, Tobbacco, anything that brings your highlight exposure down. You can't use them for everything but you can for situations where you have a clear distinction between highlight and shadow areas in say a landscape, seascape etc
I was going to say what Marco said but he did a great job explaining it. The key is to also meter the highlights and know where they fall and that determines development time. Also using a developer that is good for this work.
Definitely gonna give this a try excellent work
Thanks for your inspiration. I went out on sunday and tried it myself end made a video. Best regards Jens
I can't speak or understand German. I can count to 10 in Greman that's about it. I'll try and watch it though. Thanks.
Enjoyed this video, as it’s a bold move to get to grips with the zone system from scratch !
It may be an idea to do one whole roll, not moving the camera, with the same scene, that contains some sky, at one setting, from the single spot metered setting.
Then do some progressive clip tests, at increased dev times to find out, if there is enough dynamic range in the film, to give detail from sky / highlights, to shadow.
That way with increasing dev times you can discover if the detail in the sky is achievable, by examining the various clips you’ve developed.
Finally you may then decide the dynamic range either isn’t there in the film, or to expose for somewhere else in the scene.
It’s similar to doing test strips with printing paper.
When I was shooting regularly for a living, almost everyone did clip tests on a roll before deciding to push or pull film, as we shot mostly transparency/ reversal, and with B+W.
It will take a while, but I think you will find out quite a lot about the dynamic range...
Best wishes, Gary
I've spent years in the darkroom chasing my tail as it were. Older films had thicker emulsions that responded more readily to varying development times and dilution. You'll also find far better results using a "cold light" enlarger head if you're currently using a point light source. I switched to digital and have gone down the rabbit hole of digital printing. It's not better, just different and far less time consuming. I still keep all my old darkroom equipment in my attic just in case. And my old darkroom is now a woodshop. Another expensive pursuit. By the way, I appreciate the great quality of your videos, well thought out and edited.
For a complete understanding of the zone system, you would need to read “ The negative “ by Ansel Adams, or “ Way beyond monochrome “ Lambrecht, and Woodhouse. This is an excellent book which I think is the bible of monochrome photography. Both books delve into sensitometry, It just depends how far you want to go, and I think sometimes it’s best to go the fun way, and find out for yourself by trial and error. After all many of Ansel Adams negatives required dodging and burning.
This is the first view of your TH-cam Channel, and I am very impressed! This video was full of information and learning for me. Your video and viewers' comments added up to a wealth of knowledge. Thank you so much. I mainly shoot 4x5 and medium format (Mamiya RB67) and have been having the same problem in the Darkroom printing with having to burn the heck out of my skis (highlights while shadows are fairly decent with detail. I have been spot metering for darkest area that I want detail and increasing exposure 2 and sometimes 2.5-3 stops but usually skies need to be burned. I usually start printing with a #2 contrast filter and I find if I drop it to a #1 or 1&1/2 filter I am able to get a little more detail in the sky
The comments were very helpful in this video. You should have no problem printing if you're shadow and highlights are within 5 stops. Or a compensating developer such as Pyro.
Hello Roger, for what I understand it's like pull the film, and works better for large format, because you develop the pictures one by one. If you put your shadows in zone 4 and then develop - 2 or - 3 stops depending on the dynamic range of the scene. Big hug mate 👍
Cheers Peds
Fotografía en estado puro. Enhorabuena y saludos desde España.
You dark room technique is great I wish I could do that.
It's just practice Rick
Sent you a Sekonic? Nice guy. That’s a valuable meter.
I’m right down this metering rabbit hole at the moment too! Check out Nick Carver and his precision metering method. As a result I’ve just backed the Kickstarter for the new Reveni Labs Spot Meter. Great work again, sir, and thank you for your passion.
Me too, but it's going to be a while before we get them. August/September possibly now.
@@CornishMotorcycleDiaries I saw that. All good things, etc…
Thanks Roger, very helpful. I'm assuming it's a thing you have to learn by doing, but just when you're trying to learn (me), so often people just talk about it and it's hard to absorb that way. Thank you for showing us, for example, what you were metering on. Visual examples definitely help me understand a little better how the pieces fit together.
Cheers Billy. It's a steep curve for me also! Like you, I have to do!. You'll see what I metered on in the video represented by yellow circles.
Nice job! you are on the right path..zone system is much easier than it seems. buuuuut you need to find your own film speed. Box speed is just an advised time which works good when the scene is not contrasty. Basicly the reason for that is that manufacturers think that the majority of people don't do zone system, so they expose looking for middle gray on the scene and overdevelop a little. The real film speed has to be found (but usually you can consider it to be about half box speed for normal or high contrast). Yuor negatives seem to be still a little bit underexposed but you are getting there :). Make some simple test but probably on those kind of scenes you could still expose more (I think one stop is enough) and then developing maybe a little less, but you'll find a better developing time with experience. Cheers!
A few videos ago I had posted this on your comments.. maybe is still useful :)
@Shoot Film Like a Boss Exactly! The basis of the zone system is "expose for the shadows and develop for the highlight" . A very rough advice if you don't want to test anything is the following:
- From medium to high contrast scenes, set the ISO of your film at half the box speed and reduce the developement time of about the 30% of the one decleared by the manufacturer;
- For low contrast scenes expose at box speed and develop for the time indicated by the manufacturer.
Otherwise a simple test could be this: expose 3 scenes, one high contrast, one medium and one low contrast. Each scene must be exposed with a wide bracketing (box speed, 1 stop underexposure, and 1-2 stops overexposure, 4 shots in total). The exposures must be repeated in three different rolls (or film stripes if you can cut them) that will be developed separately. Develope the first roll for the manufacturer time, the second for 30% less and the 3rd for 50% less. With these three rolls you will be able to see what ISO are best for each contrast and even more important what dev time is best for each contrast. It's a little long but it pays off.
Manufacturers dev times are just suggestions and I would defenitely not look at the massive dev chart if you want more accurate results ;) . It's a bit long but I hope I can help you! If you have more doubts just ask! Keep up the good stuff, I really love your channel!
Thanks for that. I need to do this with the mamiya and panf50 as that's a combo I use for scapes. It's harder for the channel as I use many different films and developers and camera combos to keep a change of interest. But I must find a sweet spot for myself. I'd be more enclined to shoot a gray card for exposing. What's your thoughts on that?
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I understand that for your channel you have to use many films and developers, but the best way to learn the zone system is to stick as much as possible to one film and one developer and study this combination in depth. I would start with something clssic and more tolerant to mistakes, a classic combination would be Tmax400 (for its forgiving curve) and d76.. but that's up to you, any combination is good. Many times we attribute some characteristic to some film or developer while many times it depends on how we expose and develope it.
Beside that, I would not use a gray card to expose because the zone 5 is affected by development much more than zone 3 (that's why we want to expose for zone 3). Basicly the shadows are almost not influenced by developement time while the highlights are much more affected (zone 5 is in the middle so it is not so safe). But again if you expose for the shadows (especially with medium to high contrast) you should not use box speed.
So in the end my advice is once again this:
- From medium to high contrast scenes, set the ISO of your film at half the box speed and reduce the developement time of about the 30% of the one decleared by the manufacturer;
- For low contrast scenes expose at box speed and develop for the time indicated by the manufacturer.
Start using different bodies or film holders for different contrast so that you will be able to use an adecuate development. Depending on the results you get you will start considering exposing a bit less or more and adjusting your development time.
Remember that a scene with normal contrast is a scene where between the zone 3 of the scene (darkest part with still visible detail) and the zone 8 (lightest part of the scene with still visible detail) you will have a difference of 5 stops. This kind of scene with a "normal" development (rememeber normal doesn't mean manufacturer recommended time) will allow you to print exactly the same zones on the paper. If on the scene you have a difference of more than 5 stops you will need an N- development, if less than 5 stops you will need a N+. This will allow you to expand or compress the highlights of the scene in order to put them on the zone 8 of the paper. I hope it's helpful.. if something is not clear just ask ;)
They're great, those STOP meters… wish I could afford one! ;-)
Thanks for sharing ! Why not using a yellow filter for a bit more contrast in the sky ?
Ansel is the real guru on this stuff, but he was trying to find a way to get a negative that would print on standard grade papers. With split tone printing you can essentially have absolute control over the contrast. With a roll film camera you can’t easily develop for the highlights for each frame. For me I shoot for the shadows but then control the contrast in the print for the highlights. Not an Ansel but it works. If I have a whole roll of one subject then I might decrease the development by one or two stops depending. Good luck , great subject. Charlie
You're absolutely right. There is nothing wrong with me exposing for the shadow and dropping 2 stops then use filters in the darkroom.
Well explained!! 👍
Learning the Zone system myself, interesting Video. It was originally created for large format where you could control exactly what the exposure and development time was. I have just purchased a Bronica SQ-Ai to explore this more, I suppose the images need to be taken on the same day with the same conditions for the development to work? Great learning with you Rodger
Those using a large format camera have a distinct advantage over those using roll film or cassette. It is highly unlikely, if not impossible to go out with a 35mm camera and produce 35 negatives of merit. Being able to just use one single sheet of film and then develop it correctly is a god' gift.
Hi Roger, I'm learning the zone system too. My understanding is the development time will need to change depending on the range of tones. For example if your meter reads the shadow and highlights between a 5 stop range (zone 3-7) that is considered normal development or (N) if it reads more or less than 5 stops you will need to adjust your developing times to compact (N-1) or expand (N+1) to 5 stop or zone range. That is hard to do on a single roll of film as each negative might require different development time.
You are on the right track but not there yet. The best thing that you can do to make things easier for yourself, is to stick to one film/developer combination. Standardise your development technique and procedures, consistency and repeatability are the operative words here. Unfortunately without access to a densitometer or an accurate exposure meter with a flat disc to read negative densities, you are up against it. Any film/developer combination that I have known ( with the exception of copy films ) is more than capable of producing a straight line on the densitometric curve of 6 stops of exposure, even something like Ilford Pan F. Where you place your exposure, keeping the densitometric curve in mind, determines where your shadows, middle or highlights fall. If your film/developer has a straight line of 7 stops and you place your zone III too high on the scale, your highlights will blow, even if the scene has brightness range of only 6 stops of exposure and vice versa. I don't know how advance you are in this matter or how experienced in film developing, but I would suggest something like an HP5+ and a compensating developer to start the process. The advantage of this combination is that you retain both highlight and shadow detail, the downside is that your mid greys will be lack luster and in a low contrast scene your negs would look flat. Hope this helps. BTW, I wouldn't venture into ( N+1 ), ( N+2) development if I were you, until you knew what your were doing.
@@lensman5762 thanks. I'm settling on delta 100 and Rodinal for my standard film and developer. My reference is the Zone systemizer book endorsed by Adams.
@@Taj3d That is a good idea.
Pyro? Rodinal?
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I would stick to HC110. It is a high energy developer, but it does produce some of the longest straight line portions of the curve for most films. Rodinal does the same but because of its graininess I prefer HC110 or Ilford Ilfotec HC or the more dilute LC29. Pyro based developers are speciality developers and not suitable for beginners IMHO. With the exception of 510 Pyro ( already mixed ), most other Pyro based developers have the added complexity of having to measure parts A & B very precisely, due to Pyro being a highly active developing agent, and are highly sensitive to agitation techniques.
Always great content. I also want to to stick more with this method. If can be interested there is an interesting video of Bruce Barnbaum on place shadow on zone IV.
Great info, spot metering is my goto metering eve though I read somewhere spot is dead since matrix.. I have reinstated my om4 for that very reason of multi spot (up to 8 ) plus I have a Kenko kfm2200 which can take up to 9 spots (don't quote me on the number as it maybe 12) you can do highlight and shadow stuff.....
I agree with further playtime with the yellow filter.
Matrix metering. The trash photographers love for some reason and still never looks right. After all, these are the lazy people who take 3 shots and create an HDR that looks almost glowing. Rock face in shadow? Nope, not anymore, now this very popular image is not only BACKLIT, the rock has no shade at all!. lol
Great and fun video, thanks! I also have a L-508 and love the zoom (which newer models don't have). You should try using the averaging function on the L-508. Using three or four points, find a highlight, dark shadow, and two middle greys hitting the record button on each point. Then hit the average button and used that value. This works most of the time for me, even with chromes, which have a small dynamic range. My thoughts on your problem with the sky is that you'll never see the blue/white differences of sky/cloud without a filter. The best I've found for BW is the orange+CPL combo to give you those nice contrasty cloud scenes. Also how is the dynamic range of the Kentmore paper? Have you tried Ilford papers? OK it's been 40+ years since my last print but maybe a higher dynamic range in the paper will help? And -- have you tried using 2.5, 3 or more stops above the shadow reading based on the dynamic range of your film?
Cheers. I usually do average that way. Usually three areas though. Always works out well.
Nice video and glad you are 'into' the Zone system - it's a great system. The zone system is all about 'range' as well as 'shoot for the shadows'. I think your photo day was difficult because the light was very 'flat' and therefore your zone range would also be very flat. You shot for the shadow details which was perfect, but you also need to meter for the highlights. So, when you adjust the exposure for the blacks to make them darker (we don't want grays in the shadows of course) you will find that you also 'shift' the highlights down into a muddy gray - e.g. when you adjust the blacks you also adjust the highlights. This results (on a flat day) of the narrow zone range. If the range is below or even 5 then you need to think about extending the development (hence expose for the shadows - develop for the highlights).
Most people look at N+ (as it's called) settings. Perhaps approx 20% for each highlight stop you want to increase. So, if you range is 4 (having metered for shadows and also taken readings for highlights) you need to get the highlights up, as you know this is done by extending the development (N+). This factor is very often documented so have a look. As I say some do an approximation of +20% for each stop. So if you normal dev is 6 mins and you want to push the highlights UP the scale (for a wider range) by 2 zones, you need to add 6 mins + 40% (this can be trial and error to start with and depends on the film).
The massive dev chart (I think) has N+ and N- (reducing factors for highlights) listed for developers and it's normally on the manufacturers' spec sheet with the developer.
This is why a lot of photographers only use the zone system with sheet film as each exposure may be quite different. So we would write down the exposure and Shadow/Highlight zones for 'each shot' and then develop correctly for that exact scene / scenario. Roll film is tricky as the whole file has to be developed in one go, so there is not so much control.
Another way to get used to the zone system is to put 5 objects on a table (large'ish) with tones ranging from very dark to very light. Then on (let's say) an overcast day, you meter for the darkest object, take a reading of the lightest object. Check the 'range' of zones between them, Adjust your exposure to what you think is correct, and develop with N+ times. Check results. If you do not get the results you were looking for there is either something wrong with the light meter or the dev times or your exposure compensation for black/grays. At least you know. Best done with sheet film, or develop 120 with only one piece of film at a time to check. Once you have your perfect combo, write it down and frame it :)
This is 'kind of' what Ansel did. A LOT of tests and experiments with consistent films and developers to find the ultimate combination for landscape photography. Great videos and I love watching your enthusiasm and experimenting - keep it up :)
PS. This guys explains it quite well - th-cam.com/video/mFr0qElpQx4/w-d-xo.html
Thanks Jonathan. I'm going to wait until when I go large format and then work out my film, paper and developer combo. Martin is a great guy. We speak often. Thanks again. Roger.
Hi Roger, great content as always. The zone system is based on a concept of previsualition of a scene and how you want it to look when printed on your enlarger. First you need to find what your Exposure index is for a given film using your camera, your meter and your developer and agitation method. Once you have determined what that is through film testing this would be your normal or N development time for that film with that equipment. From there you can pick any important area in a scene and determine what zone you want it to fall on. Then you can meter where your shadows and highlights will fall to determine if you need to underdevelop to contract a contrasty scene Normal -1 or 2 to hold back the highlights or overdevelop to expand a low contrast scene N+1 or 2. It is more geared to sheet film then roll film as each scene may require a deviation from your normal development time. I am by no means an expert so please correct me if I am wrong in my understanding of the zone system. This is a very basic explanation but hope it helps. Fred Pickers zone VI workshop is the best resource i have read and well worth investing in a copy.
Thanks Carl
Could you link to that book or video in which you reference? Thanks in advance from a Beginner.
I understand that your summary is to measure the darkest area in which we want to preserve detail and then reveal 30% less than indicated by the developer? I already used the metering issue since I started using my fantastic spot meter from Reveni Labs, but the detail of developing is something new for me. Little by little fine-tuning the details. Thank you very much. Your channel is fantastic!!!
Cheers Dandy
You had the right idea on under developing, but you didn't also overexpose which goes hand in hand with that technique. When I look at your developed prints, those areas you metered in the shadows mostly end up black and the whole shot is overly contrasty. The whole reason for doing this is this technique is to compensate for the already huge dynamic range (contrast) between highlights and shadows. You should have shift that HP5+ ISO400 down to ISO 200 or even ISO 100 (pulled) which would have overexposed your shots by 1 or 2 stops, then underdeveloped. This would have given your shadows some detail and then by underdeveloping not overblown your highlights.
Very useful explanation, mate. Skies seem to be an issue with expose for highlights. Why not try a grad filter on the lens?
After taking your shadow reading you should also read the brightest highlight where you want to retain some tone. The two readings then give you your brightness range. e.g. if your shadow is EV11 (a Zone III) and your highlight is EV17 (a Zone IX) then the highlight should produce a printable tone with "normal" development. Development time will hardly affect the shadow, but reduce it by approx 20% and the Zone IX will drop to ZVIII or increase it by 20% and Zone IX will go up to ZX. The first thing you need to fix is your "normal" dev time - use a grey card - expose it to Zone iX and pick a dev time then print at the films base black + fog (using clear film). If the print is too bright, reduce dev - if it's too dark, increase dev. Easy peasy. Have fun Rog!
Yeah, it's hardly "develop for the highlights" when you don't measure where your highlights are and adjust development time accordingly.
Cheers Ray. I tried with fp4 to find my development time. I took a white card, metered for middle grey and shot 5 over and 5 over, developed normally then made a contact print using the films fog and base to find its time for max black. Middle grey looked too dark and zones 9,10 and 11 looked the same white.? Is this the test you mean?
Cheers
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Hi Roger - the full explanation can be a bit long but if you can give me your email I'll be happy to explain as much as I can. I ran a pro (hand process) darkroom in Manchester for a number of years before becoming a pro photographer for far longer than I care to remember. You can find me on FaceBook or my own email is monoffoto@care4free.net
Even using the zone system Ansel Adams always worked on his prints. Good experiment though and nice images.
Very true Mark
Thanks for sharing
Hi, another nice video, thank you!
I'am a quite a newbie of darkroom and analog photography techniques, so I am not in the position to give any lessons.... Anyway, I am studying the Zone System ad as far as I learned so far, and as someone else already pointed out, to make things work properly you have to consider the true speed of the film, that usually is slower than box speed. HP5 true speed should be around 200-250 ISO.
Placing the shadows in zone III using box speed will result in underexposure. Once you have taken care of the shadows with correct exposure the highlights can be adjusted with development; in case of high contrast scenes you can contract the contrast with less developement (reduced time, temperature or agitation), and conversely you can expand it with more development.
Hi Domenico. Thanks for your input. Film speed is a personal choice. Ilford rate HP5 at 400 as standard. Other shooters rate it differently depending on their developing technique and results they want to achieve. You have to test for your own personal film speed. Have a look at Tom Halfill website on finding the true speed for your film. It's interesting . www.halfhill.com/speed1.html
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss
Hi, thanks for your availability and kindness! Looking forward for your new videos. I think that others on this subject would be highly appreciated by your followers.
You’re the best!
Great Video. Have you tried using a ND filter to get more contrast in the sky. I wonder if this would work to get more detail in the highlights with less work in the darkroom.
I have not tried a nd grad filter Peter.
I’m a little late on this video, but it’s your developer blowing out your highlights you should try a compensating developer. I like to use D76 1+3 delusion. 1+1 delusion tends to blow out highlights quite easily.
just think of the zone system basically as pushing and pulling your film through exposure and development.
Great video, Roger! Zone III + 2! If your ZIII reading is f8 @ 1/8, set the camera to f8 @ 1/30.
Cool, thanks
I’ve been reading that many large format photographers place the shadow details in Z4, not Z3. Haven’t tried it but will.
Zone II is the shadows with the onset of detail. Zone III is shadows with discernable detail. Zone IV can be taken as the tonal value of dark foliage/dark skin etc. What must also be taken into account is the effect of any filters used on the spectral response of the film given the available light. High up a mountain there is a much larger portion of the blue light illuminating the objects. It is for this reason, that at times the shadows are placed on a higher zone. The placement of the high lights, will then have to be considered relative to the placement of the shadows and correct development indicated to retain all tonal values.
If you are using the Zone System to expose for roll film where you want to expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights, you are limited to developing the whole film for the benefit of 1 frame. Unless, you cut your film up before developing and expose the pieces separately. I shoot a Fuji GSW690 camera which yields 8 images on a roll of 120 film. If I want to think of this as being like two pieces of sheet film, then I expose the first 3 frames (say bracket the exposure of something), shoot frames 4 and 5 knowing that 1 of those frames will be wasted because one of them will be cut in half. And then I can shoot the last 3 frames of something else with a different intended development adjustment.
The 120 film is 32" long, so if you cut it at approximately 16" you will have 2 pieces of film that can be developed for different lengths of time, i.e. adjusted for different highlights. I have a 16" cutting board, and (in dark conditions) I attach the end of the film with a bulldog clip to one end of the cutting board and cut the film at the other end of the cutting board. The 2 pieces of film can then be developed separately. You can use the same developer for each half of the film.
It's a bit fiddly, but if the images are important enough to you, it can be done.
Go back at it with split grading. You will get your sky. Notice how the one you did with no filter started to get information in the sky. I think the 2 1/2 filter was holding it back. Nice plug for the daughter.
Thanks
Thank you!
Hi, but do you use effective film sensitivity to meter the dark area?
Excellent as per... BTW these meters are selling on Ebay 2nd hand for around £400 !! you have some really generous friends Roger :-)
I’m really interested to see the solutions you come up with.
I don’t have the patience or discipline to use the zone system with all the testing and preparation that Adams recommends. My approach is to shift my exposures and development roughly in the direction that I want them to go with the knowledge that I will still have to make split grade prints in the darkroom - it’s just they will be easier than they would have been had I not tweaked my exposures and development.
When metering a scene I like to look at EVs because it makes it easier to see how many stops the shadows are from the highlights. If I have a wide range from dark shadows to bright sky, I tend to place the shadows that I want to fall into zone 3 or 4 in the print at zone 5, knowing that when I pull the development, I’ll lose a bit of exposure in the shadows (although I’ll lose a lot more exposure in the highlights). I develop with the rough assumption that 20% of the development time is about one stop. (I might be completely wrong on this, but it’s what I do...) So if I want to pull my highlights down by two stops, I’ll reduce the development time by 40% (Instead of 10 minutes, I’ll develop for 6 minutes). If I need to push the film, I’ll increase the develop time by 20% per stop.
I haven’t done the sort of testing that might make it easier to predict exactly where my tones will land, but I’ve learned this mushy approach to the zone system well enough that my negatives are much easier to print than before I started doing this sort of thing. I might do some testing as I better understand what my goals are in exposing and developing.
By the way, in most cases I’m doing this on sheet film so I can develop each shot separate from the others. When using roll film, I think you have to decide how you plan to develop the roll within the first couple of shots and then set your subsequent exposures based on whether you are going to give the roll a normal, pushed or pulled development.
I think it's easier on sheet film but I'm not there yet so 35mm tests for me. World's apart I know but it's a start to try and understand it all a bit more. Headache time lol
Interesting stuff! If I’m not doing dark room prints is there still an advantage to using this method with scanning? (Files that are easier to work with?) Or would it really depend on the latitude of the film?
Ilford films have a good latitude. All I'm trying to do is get a good negative with as much detail as possible and see if it prints well without much dodging or burning. Or photoshop work after scanning
If the highlights in your sky are just a tad too bright, you might like to consider fogging slightly the upper part of your paper (the sky area). To do this, you make your calculated exposure with the enlarger as usual, then remove the negative and burn in the sky area for a second or two - you must make a test strip for this of course. This technique tucks in skies rather neatly… Ansel Adams would often ‘fog’ his paper in this way to eliminate all traces of pure white.
Lol, cheers. Or pre flash
Well despite the failure of the result with the sky, try a yellow filter, it was the best video I have watched on the Zone System. This is because you are one of only two persons to make the point that you do develop for the highlights to compress the contrast range. I thought you would have reduced the development time by 40% not 30%. However, I am not a fan of the Zone s System at all. That said, if I was, I would be playing around with the Planliegend development method, just a thought. Thank you for a rather better than average video on the subject. Personally, I generally prefer incident light metering for most scenes. TTL metering for fast moving things like rock concerts (using exposure compensation) and only occasionally do I think the Zone System is appropriate. On the sky issue, you could use a graduated filter. Anything that makes printing easier is a good thing.
Hi mate, i see your video about printing the 35mm negs with showing the film edges and sprocket using medium format negs carrier. I forgot to bookmark that video, could link thw\e video ? TIA and stay safe.
If you meter your shadow and highlights where you want detail you will know how many stops your film will have to cover. Pick an exposure in between and if your film can handle that range then you don’t need to pull the film. Just develop normally. If the range is too great then expose to protect the shadows and pull the development to protect the highlights. This works only if the entire roll has similar exposures but in most cases the film can cover the necessary spread of values. If not then decide on a shot by shot basis whether to protect the highlights or shadows.
A quick question use the Sekonic L 358 which shutter or Aperture priority which I think is the same as the L508, in the video it doesn't make clear which mode you use ? (my old meter the Sekonic L-228 just gave you a reading pretty much like a handheld meter would )
This is a really good video. I will give this a try, using my DSLR as a spot meter. Where did you come up with the 30% reduction in development time? Why not 25% or 35%? Is there a rule to follow? Thank you.
I've pulled film many times. 15% per stop was a guide I got years ago
When measuring exposure, I always use spot metering to measure the shadows. I usually make several measurements of different brightnesses, if this is possible. The exposure meter then calculates the average exposure time. If I use a color negative film, I don't expose it at box speed, but pull it, a 100 ISO film to 50, for example. I then let the film develop (I don't develop myself) according to the specified ISO value. do you do the same?
What scanner do you use to scan your negatives?
I usually over expose a stop for colour but then I don't shoot colour much. Sometimes I will spot the shadow area and highlight area and make an average, which often works out the same as incident. But mostly if I spot I will hit the shadows and stop down by 2 stops and develop. If I do this I have to be familiar with my film/developer combo.
Interesting video and great advise. One question. Why not use the appropriate strength graduated filter to bring down the light in the sky? Wouldn't that make the development and printing a bit easier?
Good question! I don't have any grad filters Wendy. They would be useful I imagine for scapes, Digital or Film. In this video I'm trying to get the best from my film and developer so all tones are in the negative.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Thank you for the reply.
Regarding shooting the tree. That’s why you use the L508 in incident mode. The tree will be exposed to give true tonality. Less thinking required.
I believe you would need to measure the highlights as well, and use that to figure out how much to adjust the development time to get the highlights to a lower value in the zone system.
I think that is true
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss gets tricky though if every shot has different lighting conditions. When using large format (sheet film) every shot can be developed independently. Roll film get a bit more complicated. I guess the main goal is to get a negative that has as much information in it as possible, and then you have options in the darkroom to get a print the way you want.
It all makes the whole process a give and take situation. Which makes it tricky and awesomely interesting. Fantastic work!!!!
@@MrPeetersmark Exactly. You want the highest density possible on the flat line of the curve. See the link I posted above. It all clicks really quick, from dynamic range, to metering, to developing, etc. It's a brilliantly fantastic simple approach, which tend to be the best. It's the same reason why you don't blow your highlights with digital, and with film, you protect your shadow detail. It's all about "density", which is information, which is data. It just works a bit flip flop with bits and silver.
Roger, I may have missed something but how did you arrive at the 30% figure to pull your development? Is there a formula to follow or is it "best judgement"? Until I saw this video I didn't realise that you had to adjust development AS WELL as exposing for shadows which I was getting to grips with but could explain why some of my pictures are a bit hit and miss, which as I am only scanning and postprocessing on the computer can often be saved, but as I am hoping to move into a darkroom in the next month or so it will become more critical.
You need to really stick with one film and one developer and one paper in the darkroom to get to grips with the Zone System and from there you'll understand how to control the exposure and development of the film in certain scenarios for best personal results on the print. 30% I arrived at dropping 15% per stop. But that was just a starting point going forward. I find my best results is using a spot meter and taking a reading on the shadow area and exposing in camera 2 stops under the meter reading as I mentioned in my other reply. If your scene highlights and shadow areas are within 5 stops then it should print well on paper.
Brilliant
Can also use a graduated filter for your skies
I must admit, Zone System steers me to insanity at times.
the Adams zone system has nothing to do with metering, it just shows the gradation of the scene. because of attempts to bind it and recalculate it into the metering feet, all the garbage happens.
@@LynxTassi Exactly. There’s a fine art teacher who utilized the zone system brilliantly, as Adams intended, in his instruction for drawing and painting. It’s all about the zones of the tones which make up the composition and lead the eye, such as the lightest light against the darkest dark as the focal point and so on down the line. His name was Myron Barnstone. He died a few feds ago, unfortunately. But there are you tube video clips of his lectures AND DVD sets of his instruction out there too. He touches on the zone system in the drawing instruction and is also a master of instruction on the golden section of design.
Hi Rodger great video. Ive just bought the same spot meter you were given having looked for six months on the web. I did notice you only took one spot reading from your scenes. I think this meter has a function that allows you to take two readings and the meter will work out the average reading of the scene. One for the highlights and one for the shadows. Have you tried this method, and if so does it help improve your images. Cheers Anthony
It allows you to take three readings Anthony and press the average button. So I can hit shadows, miss and highlights. (Don't often use that function).
Im sorry, new to photography, but how is going from shutter speed 15 to 60 "stoping down" as you mentioned? a lot of these terms seem to be counter intuitive
Down "less exposure" up "more exposure".
How can i apply this when i have my film developed at box speed (no lab to push or pull)? I would like more blacks and lens grays in my negs. Would this technique of underexposure just result is dark images? Very interested in what you would do.
I usually shoot box speed, spot for a shadow area that has slight detail, not jet black, drop 2 stops (if meter says 1/15th I'll dial into the camera 1/60th) and develop normally according to manufacturers recommended time. Has usually worked well. Depends on the subject though.
I'm about to pay you the highest compliment I can regarding your video even though I don't develop my own film:
Helpful.
Hiya Roger, would it be possible to use this process! but not reduce development, instead use a grey grad to reduce the brightness of the sky? Best.
You can always spot meter the bright part of the sky and open up a couple of stops. But I usually go for a shade area where I want detail and stop down a couple. I'll know if I have trouble with the sky if it is more than 5 stops from my shadow area. That's for a print of course. I've not used a grad gray card. I've been using 510 Pyro a lot for my scapes which helps with highlights during development.
As most people have already commented. This method is best understood using sheet film. However, from my own experience, you are better off placing your darkest shadows at Zone 4 ( instead of 3 which you were placing ) then cut down the development time by 50%. It is better also to use diluted developers ( ie Rodinal 1:50) so you instead of let’s say 20 min developing time you give it 10 min. What it is amazing then is your negs will become very thin and you may not see some of the details there on them at first! But the details are there. Once on the light table or into the enlarger you will see all the highlights!
Thanks Kayhan. Soooo many things to try here.
I'm curious about Nick Carver's Precision Metering Method. It's based on the zone system I think. I do found the Zone System is quite a rabbit hole. Beyond the Zone System is even crazier! One thing to maybe consider here is if you metered on the sky to see what the different in stops/zones was between your shadow reading. That would give you the dynamic range and you can then decide if you need to "fit" the dynamic range into the film and paper. Although using a filter, as you know, if there's bits of blue sky, I find super helpful. I only bring that up because my tests of Ultrafine Finesse 400 show that it is crazy responsive to an orange filter. Seemingly more than other films (though maybe that's all in my head).
Anyways! The other thing you might consider is doing some film tests. That's QUITE a rabbit hole but it'll tell you what sort of measureable contrast/gamma you get with your specific development process. That way you know for sure that X development time gives you Y contrast, which goes back to whether or not you need to expand/contract (pull/push) to get the dynamic range to match.
I have been doing film tests, though maybe a bit less so for metering and more for determining my raw developing times outside of it. That's because I'm using XTOL replenishment in my own DIY rotary which means the standard dev times don't always match for every film (though some do). At some point I will take it a step further and start doing some better zone systemy work. But then that goes back to Nick's class - I get the feeling he presents it in a more modern and practical way than reading through AA's The Negative, though I haven't taken the class yet so I'm just guessing there based on what I've seen of his other videos and things.
I am not quite sure if I understand the concept or the necessity of this ' precision metering '. Any exposure value read by an accurate exposure meter is accurate for a zone V placement for that tone. If the aim is to place the exposure value on the film's exposure scale in order to achieve the desired visualised final print, then Adams had already achieved this with aplomb. The problem with many a photographers trying to set themselves up for the use of the zone system, is their inability to accurately produce the densitometric curve for their desired film/developer/camera combination. Once this is known, decisions regarding the placement of the desired exposure value becomes much easier and intuitive. Until then, everything is still a shot in the dark.
Funny you say this. I thought exactly the same with fp4. I tried to create my own scale by shooting a white card. 5 stops over and 5 stops under middle grey. After developing all 11 negs on that strip (at various times) and I found a perfect zone scale on a printed contact sheet then surely I can say that's the development time for that film. I tried a few times and could not get the right highlight zones ha ha. Nightmare
Cheers Tim. It is a rabbit hole!!
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I don't know if your spot meter came with a flat disc or not. If you do have the flat disc for the meter, you are in business as you effectively have a densitometer. A densitometric curve has its Y axis calibrated in Log Expo and it is Log in base 10. Each point 0.3 increase or decrease in the Log Exp value is equivalent to doubling of exposure ( Log2 in base 10 ), EV or a stop or one zone of exposure. Zone I of exposure on the curve is 0.1 Log, above Fog and Base, 0.1 is the equivalent of 1/3 EV. So if you shoot the film at box speed, develop normally and then measure the densities using your EV meter, you can plot the curve. Once the positions of the Zone I and Zone V are noted , then you can deduct if the film speed is correct or not and what to do with the development. It is just as simple as this, but it does take a bit of hard work and being meticulous in execution. This is a fascinating subject you brought up here and one of the reasons that sets BW film photography , above trigger happy computer driven digital. Here we are in charge. I forgot to add that to measure the negs using the flat disc just project them on the disc by the enlarger and read the central portion. No need to try and print and all that. Once you have calibrated your film , then you can start to think about the placement of values on the paper.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Actually yes I have had a love/hate with FP4 and part of the reason, I think anyway, was my dev time was off for my process (and likewise how I rated the film). I found I often liked it pulled to 64 to tame the contrast and, sure enough, my film tests showed my speed is around 80 for normal contrast using my dev process. My film speeds are pretty inaccurate though as I expose the film for H&D curves using my enlarger so I'm more trying to get a handle on the curves themselves and the dev times and just get an estimate on speed which I can refine by taking normal photos.
At some point I might do in-camera tests, which is a better way to figure out ISO and also lets you account for lens flare that can impact contrast...I'm not going to do that for all my cameras, lenses, and films though, that's just toooo much data and I'd rather go shoot photos, even inperfect ones, than spending all my free time doing tests. Though when I can't get out and take photos, doing some tests every now and again adds to my growing set of data. That's how I've been approaching it - sort of a little at a time and where I think there is a need.
Of note in AA's third book (The Print), dodging and burning are mentioned quite a bit so even the perfect negative may require it depending on what look you're going for. I think it was Ansel that said "the negative is like the score and the print is like the performance" and I try and look at it that way. Otherwise, one can spend all their free time doing nothing but sensitometry.
Great! 😉👍
I need to get myslf a digital light meter. Got a few 60s analog ones, but they are no good in low light or with high ISO,s
I used to use. My dslr for spot metering film
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss That is what I am thinking, untill I get one I will use my Fuji X-T1. Been looking at the prices & some of them are really expensive.
Question: if you want to "develop for the highlughts", don't you have to first measure the highlights and then adjust your dev time accordingly?
Reading the comments it appears so!
Dodging and burning will always leave some halos, but have You ever tried selective masking? Check on Alan Ross’s selective masking, that is so impressive! I saw prints made in that way, oh dear lord what a masterpieces. I cannot do it in my darkroom, first of all it’s rather not possible with 35mm (maybe I could do it with medium format), second of all my Durst enlarger is not adequate to use it in such way.
But I know you are hungry for knowledge so try it out ;)
Perhaps if you combine your earlier experiments with a yellow filter on the camera lens with this new knowledge, you can tame those skies.
That's what I thought... Going to try that today
A quick easy and pretty darn accurate way is to spot meter a shadow then under expose one stop from that. Develop as normal and it just works.
I usually do tye same but 2 stops.
Very nice video! I’m also very interested in this zone system technique. Roger, did you use rodinal to develop film?
Xtol
Expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights is valid, but is actually geared more for when using graded paper. Ideally, you’d also meter the brightest part of the image to get your subject brightness range, then adjust development so the SBR fits within your paper grade. With multigrade paper, you still want to expose for the shadows, and can pull development if you want, but then when printing, use grade 0 or 00 and find your exposure time that gives you the detail you want in the brightest part of the image, then use grade 5 to punch your shadows and blacks in to taste. If you do that, you’ll find that you’ll almost never have to dodge or burn, or if you do it’ll be a little dodging when doing the grade 0 or 00. Remember, with multi grade paper, what you see in the final print is effectively two exposures, one at grade 0, the other at grade 5. If you do a print with a 2.5 filter, that is exactly the same as doing a print with exactly the same times for grade 0 and grade 5.
I use that technique often building highlights with grade 0 and punching with grade 5. It didn't work with this neg unfortunately. I tried many splits and times but the shadows were getting dark. It's a low contrast neg. As you say I didn't take a highlight reading. Onwards and upwards and ended up pulling a neg which probably needed more exposure. Maybe another stop. Thanks for the advice. Appreciated.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss ah... in that case, a little dodging of grade 0 in the shadow areas would fix that. I also often find that doing two prints, one at my grade 0 time with just a grade 0, and one at my grade 5 time with just a grade 5 let’s me see what is being affected by each exposure, and can adjust from there.
@@AdrianBacon 2 print is a good idea. Never done that. Normally I'd get my highlights right with grade zero then place a test strip down, hit that with the tested grade zero time then switch to 5 and make another step test on top to find how long I need for 5 filter. I'll try that 2 print out.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Often I'll find that the 2 print (one at each grade) is really helpful if I've got a mostly there image, but part of it is muddy, or too dark, or whatever, doing a print at each grade for that grade's time separates out the two grades and lets you see which part of the print is being effected by each grade. From there, usually, it's dodging the grade 0 print in the problem areas, which will lighten the dark shadows while still preserving contrast, and will also (usually) get rid of muddy areas by removing or reducing the low contrast grade 0 part while keeping the high contrast grade 5 part. It's hard to actually see what each grade exposure is actually doing unless you do a print at each grade. The first time I did it, it was like "light bulb!" and it became immediately clear what needed dodging.
It’s very simple: meter shadows and two stops under for film; meter highlight and two stops over for digital. I only meter shadows or highlights. I couldn’t tell you what a middle grey is for love or money.
That 2 stop rule also works metering shadows on digital I find.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss meter highlights to clipping point and crush the shadows in post for digital, I find. Stretching shadows open brings out noise.
Little trick I learned.
Instead of developing for highlights, use a graduated filter. Sky too bright? Two stop grad filter...Boom...Done. If your meter reads 1/15, you bring it to 1/60th, but your meter reads 2 stops over at middle grey for the sky (which is about average), making it effectively 4 stops, you put a 4 stop GND filter on, now your whole shot is at the same exposure. No mental math required. Simple, quick and easy. Only downside is that initial cost.
GND and polarizers are kind of staples of landscape photographers.
Ansel Adams's zone system was not just to produce negatives with incredible tonality. It was from negative to print. That is why his photography series starts with The Negative and then The Camera, and lastly The Print. For the zone system to work , a film must be calibrated to the developer, shutter, exposure meter, lighting conditions, Paper type, paper developer, toner, etc etc etc. All must be calibrated and work in unison with each other. Being able to accurately predict the negative density under differing lighting situations and to produce the visualised print, demands such discipline. Adams kept meticulous record of anything to do with his photography, film type, camera. lens. shutter, filter type and factor, resulting exposure placement, expansion or contraction, developer type etc. . The placement of shadows or highlights on the exposure scale using a one degree spot meter, is just a start, a good start but only a start.
Thanks for that..
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss You are most welcome Roger.
Hola! muy lindos videos, los sigo siempre! ahora, tenìa entendido que esta tècnica es SOBREexponer y SUBrevelar, no subexponer y ademàs subrevelar...o sea, medir y disparar para las sombras (sobreexponer las zonas brillantes) y revelar menos tiempo, para que las zonas brillantes del negativo conserven detalles, sin afectar las zonas oscuras...no entendì bien por què subexponer y al mismo tiempo subrevelar...saludos!!!
Omggg, what a geek!, just spray and pray 😜
I did!! Lol
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss only thing you did was photograph that canal again!..( well it could of been worse, we might have had that rock 🪨 with the dubious 🤨 history , I’ve got shoes 👞 older than that 😜
if you meter shadows, midtones and highlights, you will know whether the scene can be rendered with standard dev time. some scenes are just not worth to pursue with a roll film back and may need a grad filter, at a risk of looking unnatural. incidently, my sekonic has a function that averages between 5 meterings to give a likely good exposure time for a scene. maybe yours has it too.
forgot to add: you could try to develop in rodinal. it tends to produce flatter negatives. so the highlights should be less dense
Had same last night on a lamp. I was 7 stops from bright to dark with detail. Recoverable in Photoshop but tricky in the darkroom.
Some videos I’ve found useful:
Cody Mitchell on the Zone System:
th-cam.com/video/Mh3mkWMRpew/w-d-xo.html
Trangent (Will Agar) on adjusting the exposure and the development of your Film to match the contrast of your scene:
th-cam.com/video/OdpfRqDDZyw/w-d-xo.html
The Photography Minimalist discussion on the Zone System with Hans de Graaf
Part 1:
th-cam.com/video/ND3B50dTU-Y/w-d-xo.html
Part 2:
th-cam.com/video/_eiWF-mBwIc/w-d-xo.html
Have you received the RPX25 35mm film I sent you yet?
Not yet I don't think so. I'll check later at my mailbox
Have you tried to pre-flush your paper before you print?
Yes when I need to. I read that as it read and thought you meant pre wash my paper 🤣
Hey, you'd better be careful, your daughter may sneak into your room some night and tie up all of your shoelaces together! Just curious, my camera only has three aperture settings and only one shutter speed, haven't been able to do much shooting with it as of yet but can I underexpose my images by pulling ASA 200 film down to 100? I wanna try shooting the roll I currently have (Ilford Delta 400) at the f/16 setting to see what it'd look like, just waiting for better weather. Cheers!
I would just wait for the right light conditions for your camera. Like I do with the Holga.