Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54

Thread: Metering Technique...any problems here?

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,573

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    Doremus,

    Very well articulated and, in general, I agree with your technique. I probably over-simplified with my example because part of what I'm doing while scanning the scene is evaluating the tonal values to see where they fall in relation to my anticipated exposure. Kind of an electronic pre-visualization shall we say? Based on what you wrote, it sounds like we're kind of doing the same thing. Most times I will base my exposure on important shadow areas, but if I see that my important high values are on the edge or above Zone VIII, then I'll base my exposure on the high values and let the shadows fall where they may. Since I don't make development adjustments any more, my exposures are always based on what I determine to be the most important luminance values. Does this make sense?

    What I don't like about simply basing my exposure on the shadow areas is: What if the high values are beyond the shoulder of the curve? In Zone System parlance let's say my important highlights fall on Zone X? Yeah, I've read the arguments that one can "print through" densities that extend well above Zone IX, but in my 40 years of LF photography I've never myself seen nor have seen an example of where a fine print was pulled from that style of negative. I'll admit...could be me, and I'm not a good enough technician to print a really dense negative.

    Great discussion! I truly appreciate your feedback as I consider you a smart guy that I've learned a thing or two from over the years.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    254

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    This is awesome!!

    Doremus, are you simply saying that you find your darkest shadow area you want detail in, meter that value and then set your exposure 2-stops above that value??

    Example:
    Your dark area meters 1 second. You set your lens to 1/4s.

    Correct?

  3. #13
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    9,211

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan9940 View Post
    ...Most times I will base my exposure on important shadow areas, but if I see that my important high values are on the edge or above Zone VIII, then I'll base my exposure on the high values and let the shadows fall where they may. Since I don't make development adjustments any more, my exposures are always based on what I determine to be the most important luminance values. Does this make sense?
    ...
    It seems odd to drop the development controls, but if an image does have highlights which are most important to preserve, then expose for those and compose for the shadows. I consider all the values in the scene important in my work...the deep shadows can support and bring out the highlights or make them gaudy...with the mid tones playing an important role. Crafting the negative to fit the process and the concept is key for me. The alt processes I use usually have me expanding the density range of the negative beyond the SBR (increased development and/or film choices), so I do not have to sacrifice shadow detail for highlight detail.

    Yes...go from 1 second to 1/4 second (reciprocity failure comes into play, of course.)
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails FallsMultnomahCr_Carbon.jpg  
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  4. #14
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    6,737

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    I have not used 'development controls' in 30 years. Ever since I got my first multigrade enlarger head.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,573

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    I have not used 'development controls' in 30 years. Ever since I got my first multigrade enlarger head.
    Same here.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    254

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    What is/are 'development controls'?

    Is that when you change the way you process the film to tailor it to how you shot the photo? Like varying the development time or stop time or fixer time. Is that what you mean?

    I haven't done that for 1 year.... Hey gotta start somewhere...in 29 more years I'll be able to say the same!!!

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,573

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamD View Post
    What is/are 'development controls'?

    Is that when you change the way you process the film to tailor it to how you shot the photo? Like varying the development time or stop time or fixer time. Is that what you mean?

    I haven't done that for 1 year.... Hey gotta start somewhere...in 29 more years I'll be able to say the same!!!
    IMO, "development controls" is a pretty broad and general statement. In the simplest terms, it means changing development time and/or temp to expand or contract the high values (plus/minus development in Zone System parlance.) Taking things a step further, you can employ compensating developers, 2-bath developers, etc. Then, we have SLIMT techniques as described by David Kachel. Could post-negative intensification could be classified as a "development control?"

  8. #18
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    6,737

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamD View Post
    What is/are 'development controls'?

    Is that when you change the way you process the film to tailor it to how you shot the photo? Like varying the development time or stop time or fixer time. Is that what you mean?

    I haven't done that for 1 year.... Hey gotta start somewhere...in 29 more years I'll be able to say the same!!!
    Usually indicated as "N" or "N+" "N-" etc. Back in the days before high quality variable contrast printing paper, one needed to adjust the development of every negative to get it to print on the available grade paper that one had. Manipulating paper contrast with variable development was part of it too.

    The "N" development techniques are still vary viable today due to the interest in alternative techniques, in which controlling contrast in printing as not as easy as setting a dial on the enlarger head.

    There are some people that prefer to work with a single grade anyway, by not using the contrast filters and still use the "N" development control. Every little thing affects the tonality of a print.

  9. #19
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    18,338

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    I always spotmeter for the specific film and lighting situation actually at hand, along with a general ideal of expectation in the print. The point is a versatile enough negative relative to those parameters. In a high contrast scene, it is important to bag the correct placement of shadow gradation to the greatest advantage. This will differ between films having dissimilar toe structure.

    Yesterday I was working with trees with burn scars against bright backlit sky, yet intermittently diffused by thin clouds. So I chose TMX 100 for its long straight line and deep shadow separation, and placed those shadows on ZII at box speed of 100. Sky texture would be effectively brought under rein using the appropriate contrast filter in conjunction with pyro development. But I certainly didn't want to compromise midtone microtonality by resorting to minus development, one of the weak points in the classic Zone System approach in my opinion. Nowadays there are other options, including better VC papers and also contrast masking technique if necessary.

    If I just happened have ACROS film instead, I would have rated the film at 50 to get the shadow differentiation further up the toe, and possibly have placed those shadows up on Zone III instead of II like with TMX. Actually, going clear down to Z I placement works with TMax films if necessary; but it simply wasn't that contrasty yesterday, so I could be a bit more conservative.

    The point is, I don't accept any one-shoe-size-fits-all model. The haggard old advice to place all shadows way up on ZIII seems designed for
    shoot from the hip exposures without good metering skills, or for films like Pan F with ridiculously long toes. Just wasted real estate on the film curve which has to be compensated for at the upper end by minus exposure, thus smashing all the microtonality in between like a stomped peanut butter and jelly sandwich, turning it into blaah mush instead of a sparkly print.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Oregon now (formerly Austria)
    Posts
    3,397

    Re: Metering Technique...any problems here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan9940 View Post
    Doremus, ... Most times I will base my exposure on important shadow areas, but if I see that my important high values are on the edge or above Zone VIII, then I'll base my exposure on the high values and let the shadows fall where they may. Since I don't make development adjustments any more, my exposures are always based on what I determine to be the most important luminance values. Does this make sense?

    What I don't like about simply basing my exposure on the shadow areas is: What if the high values are beyond the shoulder of the curve? In Zone System parlance let's say my important highlights fall on Zone X? Yeah, I've read the arguments that one can "print through" densities that extend well above Zone IX, but in my 40 years of LF photography I've never myself seen nor have seen an example of where a fine print was pulled from that style of negative. I'll admit...could be me, and I'm not a good enough technician to print a really dense negative.

    Great discussion! I truly appreciate your feedback as I consider you a smart guy that I've learned a thing or two from over the years.
    Alan,

    You certainly have a point. However, most modern films (at least the ones I use) don't start to shoulder appreciably until Zone X or even higher. Knowing your materials is key here, as well as developing a strategy for finding your best standard development time.

    Let's say you have a film, like TMY, that holds its straight-line section all the way to Zone XI or so and you have a highlight that is, say Zone X. Well then, if you want that highlight to print at print value Zone VIII, then you need to have a development time that puts that negative density in a place where you can use lower-contrast filtration to get that value where you want it in the print. Let's assume your normal developing time puts that value in Zone X on the print (when the shadows are rendered how you envisioned them) with a #2 filter. Well then, you just use a #0 filter to reduce the print contrast (and/or burn and dodge,flash or whatever).

    What I'm saying is that if the film can record the detail on the straight-line portion of its curve and you have the proper contrast controls at the printing stage, you should still just base your exposure on that important shadow value. Why sacrifice desired detail in the shadows if you don't have to?

    But, you're quite right, there are times when you do have to compromise if you constrain yourself to one development time for everything. Some films don't act so nicely above Zone IX or so.

    Still, you can reduce the amount and number of times you actually have to compromise by getting that one development time squarely in the middle of the contrast situations you usually encounter. That means, if you consistently end up compromising for one extreme or the other, you need to adjust your standard development. Let's say you end up using #00 filters a lot, but rarely need a # 5 filter. Well, that means your average development time is likely too long. Decrease it 10% or so and see if things end up more in the middle. And vice-versa: if you're always using #4 and #5 filters (or equivalent filtration), but rarely a #0, then you need to increase development time.

    And, get to know your film. In addition to your usual exposure in a really contrasty situation, make make a second one based on a shadow value. Print that one at a lower print contrast and see if you can get the more shadow character and still get highlights you want.

    As for dense negatives: I like to overexpose 320Tri-X by a stop or two sometimes to get more shadow separation (moving the shadows up off the long sloping toe of this film up into the straight-line portion of the curve). This gets me negatives that proper proof as grossly overexposed; sometimes the proof is almost blank white and the high values of the negative are way up to Zone X or more. Some of my most satisfying prints have come from such negatives.

    What your dealing with, in a scene with a high dynamic range, is a negative with lots of density difference between the lowest and highest values you want detail in. That's a bit different situation, but still, you should be able to print the highlights as long as the densities are still on the straight-line portion of the film's curve.

    FWIW, I rarely use contraction developments (N-) to get the scene's dynamic range so that it prints "right" for shadows and highlights on grade 2 or whatever I've chosen for a "normal" print contrast. I find that such prints are flat, and just don't have the local contrast I want. Instead, I'll only use a "partial contraction," i.e., if the traditional Zone System calls for N-2 or N-3, I'll only develop to N-1 and then deal with the contrastier negative when printing, using a combination of dodging, burning, split-printing and flashing techniques to hold as much contrast as I can in the important textures while still getting the general density range right.

    Bottom line: try using a film with a long straight line and dealing with those contrasty negatives at the printing stage and see if you like it.

    Best,

    Doremus

Similar Threads

  1. Metering technique for J Lane Dry Plates
    By Alan9940 in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 14-Aug-2020, 12:23
  2. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 7-Dec-2018, 19:25
  3. Proper Incident Metering Technique (Portraiture)?
    By Andre Noble in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 3-Jan-2010, 14:16
  4. BTZS Metering Technique
    By mikxer in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 13-Feb-2009, 20:49
  5. Metering Technique
    By Sylvester Graham in forum Gear
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 26-Nov-2007, 07:26

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •