A better exposure segment from Seim's EXposed workshop, Gavin talks about the basics of using Zones for digital. Nothing will improve your exposure like Zones. Watch more at: seimeffects.com/exposed/
I never made the "connection" that our meters all give readings for "Zone 5" which is at the center of the Zone scale. I knew that all meters are built to evaluate "18% Reflectance" which, visually corresponds to "50% Brightness" in terms of normal vision (photometry 101)... Thank you for drawing our attention to this important concept.
An easy way to exploit the system for FILM is to spot meter for the shadow area that you want SOME detail in, reduce the INDICATED exposure by two stops (either by closing the lens opening or increasing shutter speed) and take the photo. Frankly, in many years of shooting digital and film, I don't find any real reason to use the zone system for any reasonably current digital camera - expose for the highlights and bring the shadows up in post. Obviously, you CAN use the zone system for digital but I haven't found that it produces better photos. For film you may have to adjust the developing time to avoid blowing out the highlights if they are more than 5 stops above your "shadow detail" setting which (for me) is typically zone III.
Awesome. Once the lights come on everything changes. Check out the full workshop this segment was taken from. It's a game changer... seimefffects.com/exposed
It works, if you think about the main areas you want to focus on in the image. In post processing its possible to then go back and adjust for back and white points, highlights etc.
Yes, expose for your subject. Then you can use tools to adjust in post. For example my Lumist actions let you select Zones and move them around in real time.
We need to see the change in an image moving from Zone 5 to Zone 7. What happens to the crucial area you selected, what happens to the rest of the area, the shadows, the other highlights?
@@BrunoChalifour My point is… when the shutter opens, regardless of the Fstop, the whole scene squeezes through onto the film or photocell. so your exposure will affect everything, not just the bits you want in a specific zone. Unless you dodge or burn the negative (or your photo-shopper) you won’t bring out some and tone down others. AA did just that in various parts of his negs. So….?
@@josephinebennington7247 I think you misunderstood the term "zone". It has nothing to do with specific areas of the photograph, modifying, at exposure, certain areas and not others is indeed impossible, and you are right there. "Zone" in "Zone System" has to do with analysing your image and separating each amount of light it received into Zones going from black to white [0 to 256 in a digital JPG] (through various shades of gray)-as it you would cut your histogram into 10 slices from left to right and number then from 0 to 9 (or 1 to 10 depending on whose theory). Imagine your light meter gives you a specific exposure, for a specific area of your subject, for instance a value between 75 to 100 for a JPG (Zone III) and you want it to be lighter for the purpose of what you want to achieve with the image, then you will shift to Zone IV (one f-stop more open = light x2), in other words you would over-expose the whole image by one aperture. What is missing here is the fact that the Zone System was designed for film and its processing (combined, the processing modifying the contrast and density of the negative according to the photographer's intentions), it does not make as much sense in digital photography.
Thank you. But, the full scale was always 0-10. Without 10 there is no pure white. It's been awhile since I read the Negative as it was my first stop learning Zones years ago but if uses the Full Tonal Gradation from 0-10. Ansel references 1-9 I believe as the optimal zone area he likes to work in. But the Zone scale should always be used from 0-10
@@Seimstudios That is where you are completely wrong: just check the references I mentioned at the end of my post (what are yours? and could you share them for the 0 to 10 scale please that would help the conversation). Ansel Adams in the various iterations of his book on the Zone System ("The Negative") uses a scale from 0 to IX = 10 zones/f-stops; later (1967-68) Minor White while at MIT (and after having learnt with Ansel Adams in San Francisco in the 1940s) modified the scale from I to X (10 for the non-Romans ;o) = exactly the same 10 zones, f-stops. Yours is a totally new theory that adds an extra one: 0 to 10 = 11 zones. It is just simple mathematics and history (these are facts not opinions).
As a general rule for digital exposure you expose for the important high lights, a really good book on this subject is called "the practical zone system". It's got really in depth info on the zone system in general and how to maximize it with film and chemical processing as well as digital capture and processing.
No, zones are always the same. The dynamic range of your camera has no connection to them. IN the end only black to white exists in exposure. The dynamic range of your camera is simple a measurements of how much ration from light to dark the sesnor or film can handle without clipping.
You are right in terms of exposure you are now working with 12 zones (if not slightly more as Zone 0 is total black and Zone 9 is total white). Zone system was for the latitude of BW film (and up to a point paper).
Isn't the idea to have all ten zones in the photograph? Let's say you choose the rock face and raise its exposure 2 stops. Can you still make sure you have all the other zones present in the photo?
No, having all zones in the photo can be cool because it means your using the entire tonal range (different video) but has nothing to do with the Zones system fundamentals. It's about controlling the light and placing it where you want.
It would be interesting (and fair as well as instructive) if you backed your opinion with facts extracted from the video, facts that you would correct.
@@whiteframe2745 They're getting closer, 14-16 stops in digital is mighty impressive, more than people often get with box speed and development time. That being said, a film like Tri-X can hold 22 stops of dynamic range if you develop it more, so dense you can't even see a light behind the film in the darkest spots. Mix exposing the film more and developing more and you can get immense range in film, like the film pictures taken of nuclear explosions with over 20 stops, and that was in the 60's. Colour movie film also has immense dynamic range as well.
@@parranoic digital: you can't recover your highlights, film : you can't recover your shadows. So I would assume there are some tweaks depending on digital or film camera
I never made the "connection" that our meters all give readings for "Zone 5" which is at the center of the Zone scale. I knew that all meters are built to evaluate "18% Reflectance" which, visually corresponds to "50% Brightness" in terms of normal vision (photometry 101)... Thank you for drawing our attention to this important concept.
18% reflectance = Zone 5 (Kodak gray card). {Ansel Adams... and Kodak ;o)
An easy way to exploit the system for FILM is to spot meter for the shadow area that you want SOME detail in, reduce the INDICATED exposure by two stops (either by closing the lens opening or increasing shutter speed) and take the photo. Frankly, in many years of shooting digital and film, I don't find any real reason to use the zone system for any reasonably current digital camera - expose for the highlights and bring the shadows up in post. Obviously, you CAN use the zone system for digital but I haven't found that it produces better photos.
For film you may have to adjust the developing time to avoid blowing out the highlights if they are more than 5 stops above your "shadow detail" setting which (for me) is typically zone III.
Your video is simply amazing. Now everything is coming together about the principles of exposure.
Thank you
Awesome. Once the lights come on everything changes. Check out the full workshop this segment was taken from. It's a game changer... seimefffects.com/exposed
terrific and concise explanation! no pun intended but spot on.
Great video!
Excellent video. Thanks for taking the time to film and edit it and of course for positing it for our benefit. Keep up the good work! -Migs
Glad you enjoyed it!
It works, if you think about the main areas you want to focus on in the image. In post processing its possible to then go back and adjust for back and white points, highlights etc.
Yes, expose for your subject. Then you can use tools to adjust in post. For example my Lumist actions let you select Zones and move them around in real time.
We need to see the change in an image moving from Zone 5 to Zone 7. What happens to the crucial area you selected, what happens to the rest of the area, the shadows, the other highlights?
Everything exposes corresponding. It's up to you to find the right balance for your key points.
Just do it by over-exposing by 2 f-stops and you'll get from Zone 5 to Zone 7.
@@BrunoChalifour My point is… when the shutter opens, regardless of the Fstop, the whole scene squeezes through onto the film or photocell. so your exposure will affect everything, not just the bits you want in a specific zone. Unless you dodge or burn the negative (or your photo-shopper) you won’t bring out some and tone down others. AA did just that in various parts of his negs. So….?
@@josephinebennington7247 I think you misunderstood the term "zone". It has nothing to do with specific areas of the photograph, modifying, at exposure, certain areas and not others is indeed impossible, and you are right there. "Zone" in "Zone System" has to do with analysing your image and separating each amount of light it received into Zones going from black to white [0 to 256 in a digital JPG] (through various shades of gray)-as it you would cut your histogram into 10 slices from left to right and number then from 0 to 9 (or 1 to 10 depending on whose theory). Imagine your light meter gives you a specific exposure, for a specific area of your subject, for instance a value between 75 to 100 for a JPG (Zone III) and you want it to be lighter for the purpose of what you want to achieve with the image, then you will shift to Zone IV (one f-stop more open = light x2), in other words you would over-expose the whole image by one aperture. What is missing here is the fact that the Zone System was designed for film and its processing (combined, the processing modifying the contrast and density of the negative according to the photographer's intentions), it does not make as much sense in digital photography.
Excellent and simply explained. Just a correction: Ansel Adams Zone scale went from 0 to 9 (0 to IX). ["The Negative", Ansel Adams. (fondamental ;o)]
Thank you. But, the full scale was always 0-10. Without 10 there is no pure white. It's been awhile since I read the Negative as it was my first stop learning Zones years ago but if uses the Full Tonal Gradation from 0-10. Ansel references 1-9 I believe as the optimal zone area he likes to work in. But the Zone scale should always be used from 0-10
@@Seimstudios That is where you are completely wrong: just check the references I mentioned at the end of my post (what are yours? and could you share them for the 0 to 10 scale please that would help the conversation). Ansel Adams in the various iterations of his book on the Zone System ("The Negative") uses a scale from 0 to IX = 10 zones/f-stops; later (1967-68) Minor White while at MIT (and after having learnt with Ansel Adams in San Francisco in the 1940s) modified the scale from I to X (10 for the non-Romans ;o) = exactly the same 10 zones, f-stops. Yours is a totally new theory that adds an extra one: 0 to 10 = 11 zones. It is just simple mathematics and history (these are facts not opinions).
What part of the stone face are you metering? Just eyeballing it, I can see an 8 stop contrast ratio.
I think it was that highlight part to the right.
But Ho do you do this with digital files if you expose for shadows but develop for highlights
As a general rule for digital exposure you expose for the important high lights, a really good book on this subject is called "the practical zone system". It's got really in depth info on the zone system in general and how to maximize it with film and chemical processing as well as digital capture and processing.
You use the cursors (exposure, highlights, shadows, contrast, and clarity). In fact development had to do with modifying the contrast of the image.
What if my Nikon D810 has "12 stops" of dynamic range? Still the same principles but from Zone 1 to Zone 12?
No, zones are always the same. The dynamic range of your camera has no connection to them. IN the end only black to white exists in exposure. The dynamic range of your camera is simple a measurements of how much ration from light to dark the sesnor or film can handle without clipping.
You are right in terms of exposure you are now working with 12 zones (if not slightly more as Zone 0 is total black and Zone 9 is total white). Zone system was for the latitude of BW film (and up to a point paper).
Isn't the idea to have all ten zones in the photograph? Let's say you choose the rock face and raise its exposure 2 stops. Can you still make sure you have all the other zones present in the photo?
No, having all zones in the photo can be cool because it means your using the entire tonal range (different video) but has nothing to do with the Zones system fundamentals. It's about controlling the light and placing it where you want.
The zones correspond to an exposure latitude of 10 f-stops (film), most digital cameras have more than that now so the scale should be revised anyway.
ok... my kiwis are shaking because you are close to the edge...
I dont get it , sorry
Watch it again and apply it with your own camera. It's true that from the couch it is less effective ;o)
Sad. What this guy is teaching about the Zone System is exactly backwards. Don't take this seriously. The Zone System is great, but this ain't it !
Lol, ok then.
It would be interesting (and fair as well as instructive) if you backed your opinion with facts extracted from the video, facts that you would correct.
Just watched this which is supposed to relate to digital, unfortunately it was exactly the same as the one for Film, big fail.
Maybe it's not the explanation that is bad but the listener. Film or digital, it doesn't matter, same principles apply.
@@parranoic Except digital has way more latitude.
@@geoffhoward2171 digital = more latitude than silver halide? Hmm... interesting...very interesting...😉
@@whiteframe2745 They're getting closer, 14-16 stops in digital is mighty impressive, more than people often get with box speed and development time.
That being said, a film like Tri-X can hold 22 stops of dynamic range if you develop it more, so dense you can't even see a light behind the film in the darkest spots.
Mix exposing the film more and developing more and you can get immense range in film, like the film pictures taken of nuclear explosions with over 20 stops, and that was in the 60's.
Colour movie film also has immense dynamic range as well.
@@parranoic digital: you can't recover your highlights, film : you can't recover your shadows. So I would assume there are some tweaks depending on digital or film camera
Use a grey card and you won't have to talk as much.
Using a grey card won't give you zones. That's for White Balance ;)
Wrong. A gray card is 18% gray which is #5 in the zone system. I've been using it for years. Google it!@@Seimstudios