Problems understanding the Zone System

[Fredrick]

Hi.

I am having som difficulties understanding and utilizing the Zone System. I unfortunately have dyscalculia, I cannot comprehend numbers. Therefore I can't understand the math behind the zone system meetering and development. I would however very much like to learn how to use it.

I guess the thing I am wondering is the following. If my film has a dynamic range of say 10 F/stops, since that is the number of zones. If I then place the shadows at Zone 5 to in order for them to be visible in the print, but this blows the highlights by 3 stops, putting them on zone 13. How do I develop? I'm sorry if this is an inconvience to anyone, but I really like working with largeformat and I would very much like not having to carry Lee filters everywhere I go.

[C_Remington]

It's over rated. Just use an incident meter. You'll be fine 80% of the time.

I was bad at math too.

[Fredrick]

I am bit of a perfectionist and 80% of the time wont cut it for me. I need it to be right 100% of the time.

[Lachlan 717]

You've placed the shadows too high.

They need to be in either Zone II or III (depending on what you want detail in).

Do you have a handle on how changing developing times comes in to play with this process?

[Fredrick]

You've placed the shadows too high.

They need to be in either Zone II or III (depending on what you want detail in).

Do you have a handle on how changing developing times comes in to play with this process?

No, I guess this is what I need to get a handle on. When to use n+ and n- development. So I should always place the shadows on either zone II or zone III? I see. So blowing the highlights is okay, since the developing time will compensate for this?

[jcoldslabs]

In the most basic terms, meter the shadow areas in the scene that you would like to retain some discernible detail and stop down two stops from that reading. Any areas darker than those that you metered will be close to pure black in the print. Part of the trick is deciding in advance which parts of the image you are willing to relegate to pure black and which you are not.

Next, meter the highlight areas of the scene that you would like to show detail and not be pure white. If this reading is around five stops above the shadow meter reading (depending on your film's latitude), develop your film normally (N) and all should be fine. It gets a bit more complicated if the highlight areas are, say, only three stops above your shadow point, in which case you would want to extend development to increase contrast (N+), or if your highlight areas are more than five stops above your shadow point, in which case you would want to reduce the development time (N-) to tame the contrast and hold detail in the highlights.

Testing is required to determine your own N, N+ and N- times.

Jonathan

DISCLAIMER: I realize this topic is a can of worms, and that the above is a GROSS oversimplification. And yes, I avoided using the term "zones" on purpose.

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

So I should always place the shadows on either zone II or zone III? I see. So blowing the highlights is okay, since the developing time will compensate for this?

Not necessarily always on zone II or III. I place shadows on zone IV quite often, when I want the detail to be easily visible in the print, or zone III when they are slightly less important. You may also find out that the shadow placement (and highlight's fall) are more sensitive with films/developers that have a characteristic of compressing, that is reducing the contrast in those areas. Some people refer to such films as having a characterstic curve with a long toe (compressing shadows) or a pronounced, rounded, or an early shoulder (compresses highlights). With other film/dev combinations the placement maybe less of a concern, as long as you are prepared to bring the shadows, or the highlights, back with dodging and burning, or even some masking.

You are asking to be right 100% of the time. This is a commendable, but a hard goal to achieve in a process that involves a lot of variables that will affect your results, including, amongst many others: lens, camera and meter flare, different film behaviours in different developers, your development process and agitation scheme, different enlarging and printing systems, and various paper characteristics, and, above all, different approaches to what may matter to you the most: mechanically fitting the entire subject range into the paper's range at the cost of a significant loss of control over local contrast, or a focus on local contrast enhancement at the cost of a loss of the mechanical ability to fit the whole negative range onto paper.

In time, testing, and real-use experiments will make it clearer. But if you want to get started somewhere, consider picking up a book, such as Ansel Adams's "The Negative" or Chris Johnson's "The Practical Zone System", but keep asking more questions here, and also on APUG, where you will find a good few people with a lot expertise in the nuances of the tone reproduction process, like Stephen Benskin or Bill Burk.

[Lachlan 717]

That should really help to clear things up for the OP...

[Fredrick]

I realize that being right 100% of the time might have been a bold statement. What I mean is that I want to perfect the process and get printable negatives which are easier to print than the negatives I have now. I have already purchased Ansel Adams's "The Print" and I find it very informative and I learned everything I know about printing from that book. I also have a digital copy of "The Negative", but the text is much too blurry for my eyes to read. I will most likely pick up a copy of the book in a few hours.

I feel that I should give some information about which film I am using and which developer I am planning on using. I am using the Ilford Delta 100 film now, and have 70-75 sheets left. I plan on using all those sheets before I purchase any other BW film, so that I have mastered that film. Using many films at once would make me "Jack of all trades, Master of none". I'm either going to use Ilford DD-X or Kodak HC-110 (recomendations please). I previously used FX-39, but that developer gives too much grain and I find it a pain to use. Right now I don't have access to a light meter, but I have the light meter app for my iPhone and I usually carry my digital camera around when I'm out shooting. I am young and quite fit, so weight isn't an issue for me. I am considering buying an oldstyle light meter, but I don't know if it is neccesary.

If I meter the shadows in a scene at 1/8 sec and f/16 at ISO 100. Should I then expose at either f/32 or set the shutter to 1/2 seconds? The numbers are quite hard for me, but I am determined to find out of this.

Oh and by the way, right now I don't have access to a printing darkroom, but I am going to check out what kind of facilities there are in my city. I know there is one printing room which is free to use and they have Leitz enlargers, but I don't know if they have enlargers for 4x5. I know there is a photoclub which has enlargers for 4x5, but to a yearly fee. Economy is tight, but I'll bite that bullet if I have to. Untill such a time, I will try and get myself a scanner. I might get my parents to sponsor me with an Epson V700. Right now, I am contemplating sending some Negatives to Tim Parkin and his cheap drum scanning service. We will see. Thank you for your time.

[jcoldslabs]

If I meter the shadows in a scene at 1/8 sec and f/16 at ISO 100. Should I then expose at either f/32

Yes.

or set the shutter to 1/2 seconds?

No. In this example you would set the shutter speed to 1/30 if the aperture setting remained at f/16. 1/2 second is giving two stops MORE exposure than 1/8 sec., whereas 1/30 is giving two stops LESS. In general you want the shadow areas to be exposed at two stops less than the meter reading. I think you might be able to find a chart of aperture and shutter speed equivalencies online somewhere, but with your number-impaired condition it may prove difficult to digest.

For example, all of these exposures are equivalent:

1/8 sec. @ f/16
1/4 sec. @ f/22
1/2 sec. @ f/32
1 sec. @ f/45

Don't worry, though. After thirty years of setting apertures and shutter speeds I STILL get confused at times and make exposure errors by opening up when I should have stopped down.

Jonathan