Shadows VS highlights

[seawolf66]

There is a beleif that one should expose for the shadows and develope for the highlights OK based on that premiss you shot at F16 and your meter says 1/500sec
now you adjust that to 1/125 sec just for thought sake: now you have your shadows, correct!

now the film your use-ing say to be used as 125 asa or iso [which ever] so you have adjusted this film to 1oo based on recomendation of varies information obtained:

now you need to figure out you developement time based on the fact you want your highlights , the developer that you are use-ing says 10mins with proper aggetation,

Based on these three factors what will be your real Developing Time!

So in my mind I would run the developer at 8mins, [ I think ] I belive it would let the highlights come thru good and the shadows would not be over exposed :??


The Reason I ask this question and may seem redundent but its been a long time since I processed Film :

I thank you for your time and Information on this matter:

Lauren MacIntosh

[Nick_3536]

You tested this all out before taking a photo that matters-)

I can't tell from the numbers you've given if it's a normal contrast,high contrast or low contrast scene.

If it's a normal contrast scene you don't need to change your normal developer time.

[Bruce Watson]

Getting proper exposure and development is a complex subject. There have been a number of books written on the subject. My favorite still is the classic Ansel Adams book The Negative. It will answer all your questions and many more besides.

Another book with a completely different take on the subject is Fred Picker's Zone VI Workshop. Another excellent book.

[steve simmons]

"There is a beleif that one should expose for the shadows and develope for the highlights OK based on that premiss you shot at F16 and your meter says 1/500sec
now you adjust that to 1/125 sec just for thought sake: now you have your shadows, correct!"

I am not sure I understand your approach. If I got a meter reading of f16 at 1/500 for an area I wanted in Zone 3, my deepest area with good detail, I would shoot at f32 at 1/500 to give the shadowed area two stops less than what my meter said. Remember, the meter whants to make things medium gray, zone 5, and I want my shadow darker than that. Ok, I would then meter the areas I wanted to be zone 8 which is just barely perceptably darker than pure paper white (rememeber do do your proper proof time). I would develop accordingly to get this area onto zone 8. If, based on my exposure, it was falling on zone 8 then I would have normal development.

Picker's book simplified the zone system for many people and does an excellent job of explaining things. There is a Picker based method for determining your proper proof time, personal EI and normal dev time in the Free Articles section of the view camera web site

www.viewcamera.com

steve simmons

[Bill_1856]

Lauren, obviously you are an old-timer because you still think in terms of ASA, not ISO. If you are going to do a lot of work, then it's probably worth following all the good advice that's been given you by the others.
If you're like me, and only need to do this occasionally, then I suggest that you just give twice the exposure (that is, meter at ISO 200 instead of ISO 400) and develop normally. The extra exposure and normal film latitude will make certain that you have plenty of shadow detail, and you're not far enough off with either exposure or development to completely block out the highlights.
If you can't print it with a good VC paper, then trash the negative and move on. Life's too short to worry much over a lost image which wasn't sufficiently important to bracket the original exposure.

[Brian Ellis]

"I am not sure I understand your approach. If I got a meter reading of f16 at 1/500 for an area I wanted in Zone 3, my deepest area with good detail, I would shoot at f32 at 1/500 to give the shadowed area two stops less than what my meter said."

That's what he's done, he's given the shadow area two stops less than what his meter said. He just did it by reducing the shutter speed by two stops rather than changing the aperture. Either way will work, it just depends on which is more important under the circumstances, the 1/500 shutter speed or the f16 aperture.

Lauren, the question you asked can't be answered with the information you've given.
In order to know your development time we'd need to know your "normal" development time, the times used to increase or decrease highlight density, and how you wanted the highlights to look in the print.

For example, when you changed your shutter speed from 1/500 to 1/125 based on your shadow readings, you moved them from roughly middle gray to an extremely dark gray, almost black, with some texture. The next step is to meter the brightest highlights in which you want some texture or detail in order to determine your development time. What reading did that give you? If it metered at say 1/1000 with your f16 aperture (one stop above approximate middle gray) normal development will make that highlight a light gray. If that's the tone you'd like for the brightest important highlights then fine, just develop at your normal time. But if you wanted it brighter than that then you'd need to increase your development time. How much depends on how you want the brightest highlight to look in the print.

But it all begins with knowing your "normal" development time (best determined by appropriate testing but in the absence of testing you could start with the manufacturer's recommended time for your film and developmer combination). Then from there test to determine the additional time needed to move the highlight density up by one and two stops (commonly referred to as N +1 and N +2 development) or the lesser time needed to move the density down by one or two stops (commonly referred to as N - 1 and N - 2 development). In the absence of testing an increase of 30% over your normal time will usually get you in the ballpark of a one stop increase (i.e. N+1 development) and a decrease of 20% below your normal time will give you roughly a one stop decrease (i.e. N - 1 development). I hope I don't have those percentages reversed, I often forget which is which, but if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me.

You might try reading Fred Picker's book "Zone VI Studios Workshop" or Ansel Adams' book "The Negative" to get a good understanding of the relationship between film speed, exposure, and development, as well as a testing methodology. Fred Picker's book is no longer in print but used copies can be found pretty easily.

[Brian Ellis]

"I am not sure I understand your approach. If I got a meter reading of f16 at 1/500 for an area I wanted in Zone 3, my deepest area with good detail, I would shoot at f32 at 1/500 to give the shadowed area two stops less than what my meter said."

That's what he's done, he's given the shadow area two stops less than what his meter said. He just did it by reducing the shutter speed by two stops rather than changing the aperture. Either way will work, it just depends on which is more important under the circumstances, the 1/500 shutter speed or the f16 aperture.

Lauren, the question you asked can't be answered with the information you've given.
In order to know your development time we'd need to know your "normal" development time, the times used to increase or decrease highlight density, and how you wanted the highlights to look in the print.

For example, when you changed your shutter speed from 1/500 to 1/125 based on your shadow readings, you moved them from roughly middle gray to an extremely dark gray, almost black, with some texture. The next step is to meter the brightest highlights in which you want some texture or detail in order to determine your development time (the zone system in a nutshell: exposre for the shadows, develop for the highlights). What reading did that give you? If it metered at say 1/1000 with your f16 aperture (one stop above middle gray) normal development will make that highlight a light gray. If that's the tone you'd like for the brightest important highlights then fine, just develop at your normal time. But if you wanted it brighter than that then you'd need to increase your development time. How much depends on how you want the brightest highlight to look in the print.

But it all begins with knowing your "normal" development time (best determined by appropriate testing but in the absence of testing you could start with the manufacturer's recommended time for your film and developmer combination). Then from there test to determine the additional time needed to move the highlight density up by one and two stops (commonly referred to as N +1 and N +2 development) or the lesser time needed to move the density down by one or two stops (commonly referred to as N - 1 and N - 2 development). Again, this should be done by testing but in the absence of testing an increase of 30% over your normal time will usually get you in the ballpark of a one stop increase (i.e. N+1 development) and a decrease of 20% below your normal time will give you roughly a one stop decrease (i.e. N - 1 development). I hope I don't have those percentages reversed, I often forget which is which, but if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me.

As others have said, depending on how precise you want to be, film development can be a complicated subject and doing some reading would be a good idea if you're serious about this as it sounds like you are. The easiest book I've found to explain the relationship between film speed, exposure, and development, as well as outlining a basic testing methodology, is Fred Picker's book "Zone VI Studios Workshop." It's no longer in print but used copies can be found pretty easily. Ansel Adams' books "The Negative" and "The Print" are also excellent though a little more complicated than Picker's. There are plenty of other good books out there but these are the two with which I'm most familiar and which I think are good as the basics.

[Brian Ellis]

In the above message I said: "That's what he's done, he's given the shadow area two stops less than what his meter said. He just did it by reducing the shutter speed by two stops rather than changing the aperture. Either way will work, it just depends on which is more important under the circumstances, the 1/500 shutter speed or the f16 aperture."

Sorry, my mistake. I wasn't thinking. When he went from 1/500 to 1/125 he obviously increased the exposure by two stops when he apparently intended to decrease it by two stops.

[steve simmons]

Sorry, my mistake. I wasn't thinking. When he went from 1/500 to 1/125 he obviously increased the exposure by two stops when he apparently intended to decrease it by two stops.
__________________

This is a common error for beginners and I see it all the time in my workshops. This seems to be a difficult hurdle to get over but when you do you do.

Again, I would strongly recommend either reading Picker's book or going through the process in the article in the Free Articles section of the View Camera web site.

steve simmons
www.viewcamera.com

[murrayc]

say, steve, what about your own book, pp 88-89. i just re-read it this morning. classic with good illustrations. cheers, muurry