Ansels The Negative

[6x6TLL]

Well, that uis quite likely, hic...

Monochrome Fan,

another way of thinking of it is like this:

Whatever you point your (reflected) meter at, it will give you the exposure value that you need to make whatever you're pointing it at middle grey (Zone V) in your negative. It cannot know if whatever you point it at is light, dark, mid grey or whatever - you have to know that. It just tells you the aperture and shutter speed that will result in middle grey for whatever you point it at. Nothing more.

So with a standard reflected meter (say 30 degrees), you will get an average reading of most of your scene usually. In many cases this will be pretty far off, but it will depend on your subject and the overall contrast of the scene. With a spot meter, 1 or 5 degrees, you can find something in your composition that you want to be middle grey - Zone V, and measure that with your meter. Measure something very dark and very light to set your Zone II and VIII (or I and IX if you prefer) and see whether the contrast of the scene fits within the 11 total Zones. If you only have a few zones of contrast (foggy day) you might want to consider expansion (it's in the book, N+1 or N+2), if you have more than 11 (bright sun and lots of contrast) you might want to consider contraction (e.g. N-1).

To make it easy on yourself (what I often do, spot meter or not), point it at the palm of your hand (in shade for negative film, in sunlight for positive) and reduce the given exposure (either aperture or shutter speed) by one stop (Caucasian skin is typically Zone VI). Only works if you're an old white guy

If you have an incident meter (or a dome for your reflected meter, most come with one), even easier is to simply point the dome from the subject (or light that matches how your subject is lit, if it's far away) towards the lens of your camera, and in more cases than not you'll have a perfect exposure. Not always, but most of the time. Again, if you're shooting slides, measure with the meter in the light, if using negative film measure in the shadow. This helps avoid blowing our your highlights on slide film and ensuring enough shadow detail on negative film.

As several other's have pointed out, you may be overthinking things. While Ansel's books are great references, they're not the best place to start if you're just getting into this, they are for when you have a solid foundation and some experience with the camera and in the darkroom. Thankfully negative film is pretty forgiving, and a great way to learn.

Hope this helps!

[BrianShaw]

“So with a standard incident meter (say 30 degrees), you will get an average reading of most of your scene usually. In many cases this will be pretty far off, but it will depend on your subject and the overall contrast of the scene.”

It seems that “reflective” was intended here rather than ‘incident’.

I beg to differ with the “many cases” and suggest “in some cases”. In a “normal scene”, general coverage reflective meters (or incident light meters) work just fine to get into an acceptable ballpark for negative film. The concept many seem to miss in these kind of discussions is understanding what is a “normal scene” and when advanced metering techniques are beneficial.

[willwilson]

In my experience, digital has been helpful. The instant feedback and the ability to adjust exposure instantly has been a great learning tool. I've applied this thinking to making black and white negatives. My goal is to capture the information I need to make the print I want. I might not know exactly what I want in the field and in that case, my goal is to capture as much information as possible on my negative.

If the scene has a large brightness range it might need compressing to "fit" on the negative and thus capture more information.

It might be low contrast (small brightness range) and I want to print it at a higher contrast. You may be able to do this with just printing but it may also need expanding on the negative. This case is more of a creative endeavor, the information would be well captured on the negative without expansion, you may just not be able to print it in a darkroom setting the way you would like. You might have to scan and manipulate in PS or similar.

Nailing shadow density is most important. Not enough exposure robs the shadows of information that you can never get back. To do this well, I have found I need to test my materials and my meter, with the zone system process being a helpful guide.

The zone system is definitely helpful when thinking about contrast too. Our eyes (brain?) are sneaky. They can adapt to an amazing range of light conditions and we need tools to see like the film we are using, instead of being tricked by our amazing eyes!

A negative that prints easily is quite satisfying.

[bmikiten]

Making negatives is relatively trivial. People reading Adams would probably do better starting with The Print.

I spent years teaching both the Zone System and BTZS to students and would politely disagree. We saw more issues with poor exposure (due to using the camera metering or incorrect use of handheld meters) resulting in useless negatives. I found that teaching with an incident meter - properly used - was the most effective and simple way of teaching exposure. Most people can print a well-exposed negative.

[bmikiten]

“So with a standard incident meter (say 30 degrees), you will get an average reading of most of your scene usually. In many cases this will be pretty far off, but it will depend on your subject and the overall contrast of the scene.”

It seems that “reflective” was intended here rather than ‘incident’.

I beg to differ with the “many cases” and suggest “in some cases”. In a “normal scene”, general coverage reflective meters (or incident light meters) work just fine to get into an acceptable ballpark for negative film. The concept many seem to miss in these kind of discussions is understanding what is a “normal scene” and when advanced metering techniques are beneficial.

You've made an important point here. Normal scenes are, indeed suited for most metering (reflective on a gray card or an incident meter). What people seem to miss is that the incident meter doesn't care if you are photographing a black horse on a white background or a solid white wall. It is not looking at the subject but instead the light on the scene. You can move the meter into shadows for exposure and then make adjustments which is why many students make incorrect readings with spot meters - placing shadows much lower or higher than necessary. There are many times we saw students standing next to each other taking shadow readings with a spot meter and being 1-2 stops in variation.

[Jim Jones]

Digital often has one great advantage over traditional metering: a histogram. Judging from some photos I've noticed on this site, the histogram is sometimes neglected. Even after decades in photography, checking the histogram sometimes shows the need for adjustment.

[Tin Can]

Normal

sometimes we want not normal

for effect, affect

even scientist may expose a film for correct usage

[Michael R]

If the scene has a large brightness range it might need compressing to "fit" on the negative and thus capture more information.

This is one of the key sensitometry/tone reproduction errors people make in the Zone System (and other systems).

[Michael R]

I spent years teaching both the Zone System and BTZS to students and would politely disagree. We saw more issues with poor exposure (due to using the camera metering or incorrect use of handheld meters) resulting in useless negatives. I found that teaching with an incident meter - properly used - was the most effective and simple way of teaching exposure. Most people can print a well-exposed negative.

Indeed, no agreement here. Learning to expose film is relatively simple, and most people will make crap prints from the most perfect negative. Often it seems people get the impression these so-called well controlled negatives will print themselves, or that less work will necessarily be required to make a great print.

[jnantz]

Indeed, no agreement here. Learning to expose film is relatively simple, and most people will make crap prints from the most perfect negative. Often it seems people get the impression these so-called well controlled negatives will print themselves.

I don't know about that. I've left a few eggs on the kitchen counter left the room and when I got back I was eating an omelette. I've left (empty of film) cameras in my basement, came back months later and found film in them ready to process .. im sure something similar might happen with negatives if left in the right circumstances.