I'll second Darr's recommendation for Mulligan's book. I'm not as big a fan of his photos (although there are some good ones in there), but the section on the zone system is very straightforward. Read it FIRST, then try The Negative and/or Picker's book. (I got it through interlibrary loan, but liked it well enough to spring for a used copy from Amazon.)
I make a living teaching college math, and I can tell you that there is nothing that will hinder a student's understanding more than being too detailed (try the word pedantic in your dictionary) the first time through something. Unfortunately many of us techno-geeks feel a compulsion to include every little detail. Mulligan resists that temptation. If a person gets what he is saying, then that can be modified as more info is received.
I'm just starting to look at the zone system as well. What is a good rule of thumb for development adjustment? For instance, if N development is 8 min, what would N-1 be? N+1?
After testing to find a personal EI, it's all based on development time testing to determine the "normal" developing time to get a zone VII or VIII to develop to some target net density, in my case it is developing to get the curve to cross zone VIII at a net density of 1.3 (I've included the attachment of a family of curves to illustrate).
Without testing of any kind, you can use the box speed and for N+1, increase the development time by 15 -20% and observe the results; for N-1, perhaps reduce by 10%. Observe the results and adjust.
Rather than using the zone system you can use an alternative that I have found simpler for some applications especially when I've neglected to record all the SB data when taking the picture. Use divided development or two part (so called) development. The idea is simple - the first bath is a developer and a restrainer while the second bath contains an accelerating agent. A short time in the first bath results in the emulsion absorbing the developer while the second bath with the accelerator uses the developer remaining in the emulsion to develop most of the image. There is a natural end point to the image formation when the developer in the emulsion is exhausted. As a result the sensitometric curve you get can be highly linear yielding very good highlight and shadow detail despite a wide range in the original scene. For a commercial two part developer I've used Diafine but you can mix your own soup also. Anchells' Cookbook has some detail about the process and you can Google more info.
I just checked one of my darkroom notebooks and find 2.5 minutes for each bath. Of course no water rinse between baths. IIRC a recent issue of View Camera mag featured a writeup of the process by Sandy King. Basically when done to perfection you will resolve a long tonal range in the negative. It appears that I was getting about a log 1.2 max. density but I was printing very hard with a semi point source enlarger head. This is a technique worth looking into and should be highly amenable to high rez B&W negative scanning.
Nate Potter, Austin TX.
Thanks Chuck. That is a good starting point. I established my N+1 time today; more to come as soon as we get some suitable weather.
I don't have a way to measure densities. I currently have Grade 2 paper on hand that I'm contact printing on to evaluate contrast range. I make sure to take several shots of the same scene and fine tune my development through trial and error. It's not super technical, but I was able to make a beautiful contact print of my back yard.
Fred Picker's book "The Zone VI Workshop" has been recommended a few times. Fred also wrote nearly 100 newsletters over a 20+year period.
Bruce Barlow's "Finely Focused" does a wonderful job of beginning with the basics, providing the tools you'll need to determine your personal film speed and development times for N, N+, N- etc. The book is on CD and can be ordered from Bruce's www.circleofthesunproductions.com the cost, including postage is $25. I purchased a copy for my kids, but it also includes a wealth of exercises to help the more experienced photographer continue to grow.
While you are at www.circleofthesunproductions.com check out Bruce's free articles.
There's certainly empirical methods to determine film speed and development time without a densitometer, but I find them more exhaustive and time consuming. A densitometer greatly simplifies the entire process. In case you are interested, the books by John P. Schaefer: Ansel Adams Guide Basic Techniques of Photography Books 1 & 2 are both excellent texts, IMO. If you can score a densitometer in the future, Book 2 will show you how to test for personal EI and development times---it is much easier than you probably think.
The family of curves that I displayed was completed with exposing 8 sheets of film; one sheet for the speed test and 7 sheets to dial in the development times, I was able to interpolate 2 of the times to hit my target. I store my D-76 in 16oz. bottles and I finished all the testing with 8 bottles---1 gallon; each pint diluted 1:1 in a Combi-plan tank. I completed the speed test and the dev time testing in one weekend, I'm rather slow and deliberate, was in no hurry.
Chuck
I'm sure that many of use here would be happy to read densities for you. I would, for example, and maybe there's a member with a densitometer near you. I agree with Chuck: using a densitometer is easier than empirical methods.
Bookmarks