Exposure systems

[Quantumcat]

I am new to the world of large format photography and have the first of what will most likely be many stupid questions. I shot 35mm and some med. format film back in the 80s, and have been shooting 35mm digital for the last 4 years so I am familiar with the basics of photography. My question is on exposure systems. There seems to be at least 4 systems out there.
1. Zone system by Ansel Adams
2. BTZS by Phil Davis
3. VIDEC system by Andrew Eads.
4. Use your digital SLR to figure it out and adjust for bellows?

Without starting any kind of a Mac/PC or Canon/Nikon type flame war, what does everyone here use?

I will be shooting B/W landscape type stuff and at least at first having a local photo store developing the negatives. At that point I will most likely have the negatives scanned into the computer and use NIK/Photoshop for finial processing.

[Bruce Watson]

They all come down to the same thing: Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights. What the various methods do is teach you how to accomplish that. So it's only a matter of picking the system that best fits your own particular way of working -- the one you are most comfortable with.

Me, I use a modified Zone System approach.

[Leigh]

Get a good exposure meter and do what it tells you to do.

I use a Sekonic L-558, which does incident and 1° spot.

As with any new discipline, choose one set of tools and use them until you understand their strengths and weaknesses.

As Bruce said... Expose for the shadows. You can't print detail that's not on the negative in the first place.

Shoot Fuji Acros (b&w 100ASA). You can't blow the highlights even if you try.

The various "systems" all do the same thing.
They let you translate one particular tone/color of the subject to one particular gray scale value.
And that's all they do. They can't change the laws of physics or chemistry.

Then comes the subject of development.
You can expand or contract the tonal range of the negative a bit by changing development.

But that's all high-school level stuff. You're still in grade school.
Learn to make a good negative from a normal subject. That alone can take a lifetime of practice.

- Leigh

[Mark Barendt]

I wrote this a while back to help people get a feel for metering. http://www.apug.org/forums/forum216/...-metering.html

[Ken Lee]

If you don't want to discuss the pros and cons of each system - and merely want a tally of how many people use each - then perhaps a poll is better than a discussion.

[Mark Barendt]

They all come down to the same thing: Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights.

Dunn & Wakfield, in their Exposure Manual talk about various way besides exposing for the shadows and why it might be good to do it differently. It's a good reference and can be found used 3rd and 4th editions are most relevant.

[Leigh]

I wrote this a while back to help people get a feel for metering.

That's a good writeup, Mark.

I use incident metering unless there's something unusual about the subject, then I vector off into ZS.

- Leigh

[Jim Noel]

Ansel Adams and Fred Archer worked together to formulate the Zone System as a way to gain consistency in exposure and development of film and paper. All others have come after, and offer variances on the original.

[BrianShaw]

Get a good exposure meter and do what it tells you to do.

This kind of advise often seems to disputed vehemently... but, honestly, it is the best option. Go with one of the "systems" when/if it will do something to improve upon the basic approach which Leigh so clearly stated. And this is especially true when having a lab process for you and scan/photoshop the prints.

p.s. PC and Nikon

[Ken Lee]

Brushing aside the suggestion that we merely brush aside the issue and do what the meter tells us to do (I have never heard my meter tell me to do anything: perhaps I need my hearing checked) - another interesting method not mentioned here has been proposed by Sandy King for those who scan their film.

If we use a highly compensating developer which develops negatives to a uniform contrast index - such as Divided Pyrocat or Diafine - then we can meter for the shadows and let the developer handle the high values. The simplest way to do this is to take an incident reading for the "open shadows" (a BTZS term) with a meter set at 2x the effective film speed or ISO.

Because the developer guarantees highlight definition, issues of compression and expansion get relegated to post-processing. Every shot is exposed and developed the same way. This approach is welcome when shooting roll-film, since we don't have to worry about the brightness range of any scene: all are handled automatically.

See http://www.largeformatphotography.in...en-development and http://www.largeformatphotography.in...r-Hydroquinone