A Lazy Man's Zone System

[mshchem]

I just wanted to use my camera's built-in light meter and make nice prints.

I had great results with my first camera Pentax with a averaging meter. Then (in 1973) I switched to a Nikon F2S, center weighted, I didn't know how to use it.
I believe sunny 16 and the old dataguides.

Nikon F5 matrix metering rocks

 

[MattKing]

All of these suggestions are useful, but in a lot of cases they are solutions for particular problems.
Try the John Finch suggestion if you would like, but do it in stages.
Do steps one and two - making sure that you identify which negatives are exposed at what meter setting. Including something like a chalkboard showing the meter setting used in the scene itself is one really good way. And make notes about exactly what you pointed the camera at, and what setting you used on the camera - some cameras allow you some metering choices.
And for each scene you photograph, take a cel phone shot too.
Then share with us a look at your negatives - backlit as previously described - along with the reference cel phone shot of the scene.
Much of this is, of course, far easier in person than on the internet.

 

[F4U]

I have an idea that brother Ansel every really used his zone system all that often. He wrote books about it, but the writing of books was undoubtedly a large part of his income. I'm sure he was mindful of it, but seriously doubt he was filling out his charts for every negative with a strict rigid unrelenting procedure. And none of us can know how accurate his shutters were. It's certain HE couldn't really know. I'll bet he didn't even have an ebay account and own a cheap Chinese shutter tester. Neither could he have much of idea of the color response graphs of his exposure meters. He certainly would not write an authorttative set of books and admit that he probably shot several negatives and cherry picked the best after developing the film, just to find the best one WASN'T the one he thought.

 

[dcy]

And parts of that video might help a bit - but any connection with the Zone System is truly misleading.
Do you have anyone around you with some experience who can give you feedback about your negatives?

I do not. Perhaps I can post some of them in this forum from time to time?

Right now I'm in the process of doing that test where I shoot the same scene many times and develop it with different developers to start to understand how the developer affects things. Two weekends ago I shot 5 rolls of film. This last weekend I prepared the working solutions for 4 developers and now I'm almost done developing all the strips for the first roll.

 

[dcy]

Well do you know what your camera's meter is actually measuring? Historically there were averaging meters, center-weighted meters, spot meters, matrix metering. Do you know which system your camera features?

Yeah. It's a Pentax 17. PetaPixel describes it as a "partially center-weighted averaging metering".

 

[MattKing]

I do not. Perhaps I can post some of them in this forum from time to time?

Right now I'm in the process of doing that test where I shoot the same scene many times and develop it with different developers to start to understand how the developer affects things. Two weekends ago I shot 5 rolls of film. This last weekend I prepared the working solutions for 4 developers and now I'm almost done developing all the strips for the first roll.

That multiple developer approach is really going to slow down and complicate things I'm afraid.
You really need to figure out how to use one developer first, in order to have negatives that you can use as a reference.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

My interest in film photography is at the lever where I have a budget enlarger and want to make prints, but not at the level where I want to use a manual camera, meter every scene, use a densitometer, and actually learn the zone system. I want to share my plan for how to tune my process. I was hoping someone could confirm that this is probably good enough for an amateur to get prints he'd be happy to put in the family photo album. I started with John Finch's "EZ Zone System" and dumbed it down by removing the light meter:

Step 0: Pick a film + film developer + paper combo [*].
Step 1: Go outside, find a scene with moderate contrast, and take several shots with a range of ISO settings.
Step 2: Use the enlarger to make a test strip through the film base and find the shortest exposure that makes the blackest black that your paper + paper developer can produce --- This is your enlarger setting for this combo [*].
Step 3: Enlarge the photos with that setting and find the ISO where you can first see shadow detail. --- This is your personal film ISO.
Step 4: Go back outside, shoot another roll at that ISO, cut it into strips. Develop each strip for a different time. Find the development time that allows you to see details in the highlights.

Done! Now you have your default development time + film ISO + enlarger settings. Some scenes still require adjusting EV and scenes with too much or too little contrast may require Grade filters at the enlarger. For roll film, don't mess with the film development time unless the entire roll is of very similar scenes.

Using a different film, developer, or paper would require doing a new test.

What do you think?

sophistication through simplicity! Bravo

 

[F4U]

D-23 or D-76 Both s bit grainy for a half frame camera. but i doubt there is ANY developer not grainy on a half of a postage stamp negative.

 

[dcy]

That multiple developer approach is really going to slow down and complicate things I'm afraid.
You really need to figure out how to use one developer first, in order to have negatives that you can use as a reference.

Understood. Can I at least pick different developers for different films --- e.g. always develop Fomapan 400 with D-23 and always develop Kentmere 100 with PC-TEA?

 

[dcy]

D-23 or D-76 Both s bit grainy for a half frame camera. but i doubt there is ANY developer not grainy on a half of a postage stamp negative.

I have seen online photos of 5x7 and 8x10 prints made from half-frame that I thought looked really nice. I'm not saying that they were not grainy --- the 5x7 print from Foma 400 had extremely obvious grain, but I it was nice.

I'm sure the grain will be more apparent when I'm holding the print in my hands instead of seeing a photo of it on a computer screen.

 

[F4U]

Understood. Can I at least pick different developers for different films --- e.g. always develop Fomapan 400 with D-23 and always develop Kentmere 100 with PC-TEA?

There's nothing wrong with having 2 favorite developers, one each for the 2 most common films you will be using. But 4? I've been in photography since 1971 and 4 different film developers is too many balls in the air to juggle. All you'll get from that is no dependable set working procedure, ever. Regards.

 

[aconbere]

Understood. Can I at least pick different developers for different films --- e.g. always develop Fomapan 400 with D-23 and always develop Kentmere 100 with PC-TEA?

You’re in charge boss. But if it were me (it isn’t). I’d pick a nice 400 speed film and a bottle of HC-110 and spend a year shooting that until I was so sick of it I couldn’t stand it anymore.

I can see your posts across the forum and see you reaching in all directions, but I’m not sure I would recommend diving so deep on so many topics without having a firm grasp of the basics.

Mastering a single film and developer will reduce the variables you’re dealing with. You are at the beginning of a long journey and if you spend all of your time going breadth first, it will be so much time that could be used for taking pictures and making prints, and learning to see.

By and large, film and the analog processes are very forgiving. Many many many great images have been made just picking up the camera and taking the picture. Deeper knowledge and technique can assist in creating more easily usable negatives but it is NOT necessary.

Perhaps a more fruitful approach would be to bring situations you’re finding challenging (i shot a roll of film in the snow and the negatives were hard to scan) and see what answers the members can give.

 

[MattKing]

Understood. Can I at least pick different developers for different films --- e.g. always develop Fomapan 400 with D-23 and always develop Kentmere 100 with PC-TEA?

You can make any choice you wish.
It is just that you should wait a bit.
You need to get to the point of where you know how you want your negatives to come out. One general purpose, easy to use and easy to obtain/prepare developer that you can get used to and will give you good results with almost all films. D-23, PC-Tea, HC110 dil B, D-76/ID-11 - they all will give pretty similar, good quality results with little negatives. Use standard dilutions and agitation, and get used to it.
Once you can reliably produce good quality negatives, you will then be able to appreciate what changing developers does for you - but not before.
If you start experimenting too soon, you will never know whether any change is due to the developer, or due to some other variable.
And you will realize that the differences between developers are smaller and less important than many people believe.

 

[mshchem]

I have an idea that brother Ansel every really used his zone system all that often. He wrote books about it, but the writing of books was undoubtedly a large part of his income. I'm sure he was mindful of it, but seriously doubt he was filling out his charts for every negative with a strict rigid unrelenting procedure. And none of us can know how accurate his shutters were. It's certain HE couldn't really know. I'll bet he didn't even have an ebay account and own a cheap Chinese shutter tester. Neither could he have much of idea of the color response graphs of his exposure meters. He certainly would not write an authorttative set of books and admit that he probably shot several negatives and cherry picked the best after developing the film, just to find the best one WASN'T the one he thought.

Good Father Ansel knew how to wait for the best light and how to use a red filter. And he was a master printer. The man knew how to direct the production of amazing mass produced books and calendars too.

Ol Ansel was quite a grand photographer

 

[Craig]

I learned photography on slide film and I think it really helped me. The reason is that slide film is very unforgiving, it generally has an exposure latitude of ± ½ a stop, so the errors show up very quickly. With the slides, the exposed film is the final product, so there is no intermediate negative stage to make corrections.

The first few rolls were terrible, but I got better with practice and it helped to have several mentors who showed me the limitations of my cameras light meter; what situations to use the reading and what situations to deviate from its suggestions. With that practice I can still estimate the proper meter reading by eye usually within ½ a stop. Took a while to get to that point!

Probably not too practical now, as E6 processing is a lot harder to find. Back when I learned I could drop the film off by 8:30 in the morning and have it back by noon. Those were the days...

 

[dcy]

There's nothing wrong with having 2 favorite developers, one each for the 2 most common films you will be using. But 4? I've been in photography since 1971 and 4 different film developers is too many balls in the air to juggle. All you'll get from that is no dependable set working procedure, ever. Regards.

I can bring it down to 2 developers. I will try to decrease the number of films, but it would be difficult for me to make it just two. I understand that juggling so many things is highly inefficient. Unfortunately, I have to weigh efficiency against how my brain works --- I have a mild ADHD which I've learned to manage relatively well, but that requires a constant balancing act: If I restrict myself too much, I'll just get sick of the whole thing, but if I restrict myself too little I'll never progress and will get frustrated anyway.

 

[dcy]

You need to get to the point of where you know how you want your negatives to come out. One general purpose, easy to use and easy to obtain/prepare developer that you can get used to and will give you good results with almost all films. D-23, PC-Tea, HC110 dil B, D-76/ID-11 - they all will give pretty similar, good quality results with little negatives. Use standard dilutions and agitation, and get used to it.
Once you can reliably produce good quality negatives, you will then be able to appreciate what changing developers does for you - but not before.
If you start experimenting too soon, you will never know whether any change is due to the developer, or due to some other variable.
And you will realize that the differences between developers are smaller and less important than many people believe.

Thanks for the advice.

I've flipped a mental coin and I've chosen D-23 1+1 with Ilford agitation at 20°C as my standard.

I have a 750 mL of D-76 and PC-TEA at home. I will use up the D-76 to not let it go to waste, but I won't buy more. PC-TEA has a long life, so it can sit on the shelf.

I know that in an ideal world I should restrict films too, but I'm not there yet. I'll try to gradually wind down the number of different films I use.


PS: I shot a roll of film with the same scenes over. Earlier today I cut it into pieces and developed them in PC-TEA, D-23 1+1, D-76 1+1, and Thornton's 2 Bath. The results look quite similar to me. I enjoyed the process of making and using D-23 1+1 more than the others, so it wins.

 

[reddesert]

I have two suggestions.

1. For equipment: Pick one camera, one meter, one film, one developer, and stick with it. You can use two films if you want. Expose the film at box speed and develop according to the recommended time and agitation. Don't mess around with funny stuff like pushing, pulling, semi-stand, or whatever the flavor of the month is.

2. For technique: This is more important than whatever equipment you choose. Stop watching photography videos. Get a good book that is aimed at a relatively introductory level but covers black and white film and darkroom work. Don't get deep into the weeds with advanced techniques, EI testing, blah blah blah. I think people already named some books in another thread, but my suggestions would include:

- the "Ansel Adams Basic Techniques of Photography" edited by John Schaefer (not the actual Ansel Adams Camera/Negative/Print books, which are good, but not what you need).
- Henry Horenstein, "Black and White Photography, a Basic Manual"
- David Vestal, "The Craft of Photography" - this is old, but very sensible IIRC.

It doesn't really matter which one, just read it and expose some film and make some prints to see what is going on. Don't get distracted and go down internet rabbit holes. You'll make some mistakes, that's normal. Look at your negatives and try to understand why you overexposed scene A and underexposed scene B (the backlit one), and so on.

 

[koraks]

I just wanted to use my camera's built-in light meter and make nice prints.

No problem. Forget about the zone system. Learn how to use your camera's light meter, and on cameras with meters that are not very precise, err to the side of overexposure. Set the ISO on your camera to the film's box speed or up to one stop slower if you want to build in some extra margin. Develop your film normally. You will now be able to make fine prints using modern variable contrast enlarging paper.

This is literally all you need. It's all very simple.

The cases we see here with people complaining about having negatives that are difficult to print boil down to two main reasons:
1: A lack of understanding how to use a light meter (in camera or separate meter).
2: Experimental darkroom tricks resulting in too thin or too dense negatives.

The solutions, thus, are:
1: Understand and learn to use the light meter(s) you carry.
2: Develop your film normally as per the manufacturer's instructions - or at least in such a way as you've demonstrated to yourself will give consistently printable results.

 

[Nige]

Step 0: Pick a film + film developer + paper combo [*].
Step 1: Go outside, find a scene with moderate contrast, and take several shots with a range of ISO settings.
Step 3: Enlarge the photos with that setting and find the ISO where you can first see shadow detail. --- This is your personal film ISO.
Step 4: Go back outside, shoot another roll at that ISO, cut it into strips. Develop each strip for a different time. Find the development time that allows you to see details in the highlights.

Done! Now you have your default development time + film ISO. Some scenes still require adjusting EV and scenes with too much or too little contrast may require Grade filters at the enlarger. For roll film, don't mess with the film development time unless the entire roll is of very similar scenes.

Using a different film, developer, or paper would require doing a new test.

What do you think?

Contrary to what other have said, I think these steps are worthwhile. For Step 1, start at box speed and add stops, no point reducing exposure for 'normal' developers IMO. For step 4, just pick one scene with shadow detail (acts as double check for test one) and highlights (i.e. sun falling on objects in frame). With these personal ISO and development parameters, you can go forth and photograph knowing you'll be in the ballpark. Post up a backlit photo of your chosen negs for comment by the throngs!

 

[What About Bob]

Very sound advice and suggestions that you have received. Less is better. Get acquainted with two different ISO films and one developer. One print developer and paper stock. Your focus should be on making great and pleasing images.

Learn your equipment, technique, subjects, types and quality of lighting and composition.

When you work slow on one or two things for a certain amount of time then impatience can become the thing. When you take on too much at once for a short amount of time then discouragement becomes the thing. Best is sticking to one or a few things at a slower pace. In time the impatience will decrease.

I remember the first time I was introduced to a film changing room, film developing station and darkroom at a local community college in 1992. Discovering SLR photography and learning how to make images was a fascinating experience and feeling for me, still is. Learning what was available with photography added to the excitement and it was so easy to get mixed up in the chaos. The extra items that are available will be there for you when the time is right. Gain knowledge of what the capabilities and limitations of your current tools are. That knowledge carries you on to the next step when trying something new out.

It isn't where you are heading, it is the ride that should be enjoyable.

 

[koraks]

Learn your equipment, technique, subjects, types and quality of lighting and composition.

Solid advice. Shoot lots, accumulate flying hours. That's how we get there. A pencil and a paper napkin only gets you so far, and in the end, what makes a good photograph is aspects such as subject matter, composition and lighting. All the rest is diligent execution only. Yet, we focus on the technical aspects and tend to lose ourselves in it, while we'd be better off going out making some images.

 

[Yezishu]

This is getting a bit complicated? The zone system was designed for large format film, where you can adjust development for each sheet—quite different from 35mm film.

Here’s my suggestion:
1. Get a standard 24-color card or a black/white/gray card with known reflectance values. Use a stable light source, like clear afternoon sunlight.
2. Use a camera with manual exposure. Meter and focus, then shoot a series at +2, +1, 0, -1, and -2 stops by adjusting only the shutter speed.
3. Cut the film into small test strips (five or six half-frames), develop them in standard developer, and scan or print them using standard procedures.
4. Once you’re happy with the results, experiment with different development methods.

These test shots—from +2 on the white card to -2 on the black card—will show you the film’s exposure range and detail retention. Typically, details remain visible from -1 to +2 stops, even as brightness changes.

Compare your test scenes to the actual film results. This gives you reference points: for example, if your subject is as bright as a white card (like snow), you’ll know what exposure renders it correctly when metering off a gray card. You can also see the difference between metering off gray versus white. In real situations, if you only have a white object to meter from, you’ll know how to adjust. If you want to skip the light meter, the Sunny 11 or Sunny 16 rule will also get you close.

5. Once you’ve dialed in exposure and development, take a well-exposed negative with full detail. Use this to test different enlargement settings and see which gives the best results.

In short: break the process into clear steps, always compare with the standard sample, and change only one variable at a time.
I'm a bit concerned about introducing too many variables at once: scenes and lighting, film and developer combinations, the programmed metering of modern cameras, and even the enlargement process. With so many factors in play, how will you be able to analyze the results effectively?

 

[grain elevator]

All you really need is to ollow developing instructions by manufacturers, the more solid ones aren't bullshitting us, contrary to what the internet believes.
Learn to use exposure compensation and err on the side of exposing more rather than too little.
Then focus on making good photographs and making prints. You'll see quickly enough if you're not getting what you want, but there's really no reason you should not. Generations did without overthinking.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Learn your equipment, technique, subjects, types and quality of lighting and composition.

Learn how to use your camera's light meter, and on cameras with meters that are not very precise, err to the side of overexposure. Set the ISO on your camera to the film's box speed or up to one stop slower if you want to build in some extra margin. Develop your film normally. You will now be able to make fine prints using modern variable contrast enlarging paper.

This is literally all you need. It's all very simple.

This is the best advice. As I said, the whole process, from taking the photo to developing your print, cannot be "EZ". Not only that, it actually becomes more difficult the more experience you get, because the more experience you get, the better you want your negative to look, the better you want your print to look, the more you work to solve the problems you run into, the more you work to reach the exact result you want.

The whole process is not "EZ", but this doesn't mean that each step in it isn't simple. Learning what a light meter — whether on or off camera — does and how it does it is quite simple. Mastering that learning, however, takes time.

I like what John Finch does in his videos, most of the time, even if I think his title on the one you watched is a bit misleading. The problem with learning through this type of YouTube videos is that since you watch them one at a time and usually pick one whose subject is of interest (or has an appealing title), you lose the sense that learning a craft is a process that has to be built a certain way, and that some things can only be learned — can only make sense in the process — after others have been learned, if not mastered.