‧ ‧ ‧ - - - ‧ ‧ ‧

[zbvision]

It’s been a while since I’ve taken 4x5 exposures on a consistent basis, much less practicing how to meter for the Zone System, so I figured I would reach out with a forum post in search of sound advice.

I have taken 6 exposures of this same scene and individually developed 2 already. I am trying to determine which of these two negatives

1.) Have more “zones” in them (preferably with zone III placed on greatest shadow I want detail in, and Zone VII, greatest white I want detail in, plus every zone in between)

2.) Which negative would be best for digital scanning (leaning towards the top picture in photo #1; top photo F/32 at 1/15th second)

3.) Which negative would be best for darkroom printing (leaning towards the bottom picture in photo #1 because it seems to be more dense and would thus allow greater control over the final print; bottom photo F/32 at 1/4th second)

4.) Where would you suggest I go from here with the other 4 I have left to develop? Bottom was N-2 and top was N-1.5 (if such a thing doesn’t exist, well, I invented it). Next photo I will develop was shot at F/32, 1/30th of a second)

Reason I am having trouble with this scene in particular is because I never photograph scenes where the main subject is the whitest part.

Thanks in advance for all the help!

P.S. These are cellphone photos of the negatives laying atop a light table. I currently don’t have access to a scanner or darkroom, lest I would run proper tests myself.

[Alan Klein]

I inverted them. I'd say the top of photo 1 of 3 is better than the bottom. And 3 of 3 is better than 2 of 3. Has more detail.

[Fred L]

I think I would have an easier time and get better results for both methods, with the top negative. In my experience negatives that are dense/er don't scan as well as 'normal' to very slightly thin negatives. ymmv

[Alan9940]

In my experience, and agreeing with Fred L, dense negatives don't scan all that well (caveat, based on my flatbed scanner.) Also, Zone 2 is a really low placement for detailed shadow areas. I don't ever place these values lower than Zone 3 and, occasionally, Zone 4. You might get away with a low placement like that with a film exhibiting a very straight response curve, but, generally, you want your shadow areas up in the straight-line area of the curve.

[Alan Klein]

In my experience, and agreeing with Fred L, dense negatives don't scan all that well (caveat, based on my flatbed scanner.) Also, Zone 2 is a really low placement for detailed shadow areas. I don't ever place these values lower than Zone 3 and, occasionally, Zone 4. You might get away with a low placement like that with a film exhibiting a very straight response curve, but, generally, you want your shadow areas up in the straight-line area of the curve.

What if you were going to send out your negative to a pro drum scanner company and then make a print?

[zbvision]

Thank you all for your respective contributions. I’d like to note that I do plan on having the best negative drum scanned with a Heidelberg Tango drum scanner (if that changes any of your initial opinions, than do please let me know). I also meant to say zone III through zone VII, so that has been edited in the original post. I do think the top looks like a more workable negative overall, however it does have far less shadow detail than the bottom picture. However, the bottom picture does have more blown out highlights compared to the top. Both are the exact same level of sharpness because I did not change the camera position between each exposure, nor the aperture, but rather chose to only change the shutter speeds between exposures. In closing any opinions on how I should develop the next exposure, f/32 at 1/30th of a second? Should I opt for N-1? Cheers

[Alan9940]

What if you were going to send out your negative to a pro drum scanner company and then make a print?

I would go for a denser negative, if going with a drum scan as these units can dig into the shadow areas better than any consumer level flatbed scanner. The higher end flatbed scanners would probably be indistinguishable from a drum scan, but I don't have the budget for either.

[zbvision]

I would go for a denser negative, if going with a drum scan as these units can dig into the shadow areas better than any consumer level flatbed scanner. The higher end flatbed scanners would probably be indistinguishable from a drum scan, but I don't have the budget for either.

Just the type of information I was looking for.

To wrap this post up, I also wanted to ask about the white marks in the outer margins of the negative, where the film type is indicated. I don't know how these marks came about. There aren't any light leaks on the negative area itself, but there seems to be some in the margins. I am developing these as single sheets on a jobo 2509n reel inside a jobo multitank 5 atop a beseler motorbase for constant agitation. Could these be residue marks left on the margins of the film on account of improper cleaning of either the reel or the drum? Could film holder light leaks or pinholes in the bellows be the more likely culprit? (my guess is no, as there would also be light leaks in the image area itself, but I could be wrong in this regard).

Cheers

[Joe O'Hara]

I couldn't really see anything that looked like fog in the images you posted here. Film holders (and the camera itself) are often the bad actors in situations where negatives get fogged. You could take a holder with two sheets of film in it and just handle it a bit in normal light (outside is a severe test, but they are supposed to be really light-tight) and then develop them to see if any fog shows up. You could do the same thing with your camera (after pulling the dark slide of course).

What I did notice is that the top of the images where the sky is seemed to have a slight loss of contrast, probably due to stray light in the camera from the sky. One piece of gear you really can't do without, IMO, is a lens shade. LF lenses typically have such a big image circle that the whole inside of your camera is lit up when the shutter opens. The lens shade can drastically cut down on that effect. It made a big difference in my pictures, so I consider it worth the nuisance factor.

[ic-racer]

Try to make the best print you can from each of the negatives. If there is a tie, choose the negative with the least exposure.