A Lazy Man's Zone System

[dcy]

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?

 

[Alex Benjamin]

How about you keep the light meter and ditch the EZ Zone System and all the testing? I honestly don't understand what you're trying to get at. What's the point in trying to find your film's ISO if you're not going to use a light meter? And where did you get that when one uses a manual camera and meters every scene — which I do —, you also need to have a densitometer — which I don't?

You sound like you're looking for shortcuts, yet you're willing to do tedious testing that won't give you that much. It's a bit confusing. It might be me — I'm of the school that thinks learning to use a meter correctly in the field is much more profitable that learning that your film has an ISO 1/3 stop less than box speed.

That said, I don't see how you can do steps 1, 3 and 4 if you don't use a meter. Moreover, I don't know what you mean by "this is the enlarger setting for this combo" in step 2. If you're saying that every frame of the same film developed in the same developer will always need the same time under the enlarger, you're in for a surprise.

 

[boring old man]

Yes; each film is different, developer choice can influence film speed, different papers have different density curves.
Every film, developer, paper combo would require the same testing.

 

[aconbere]

I think you’re on the right track.

Check out Paul Wainwright’s “Use Your Eyes” essay. He suggests that you can get a very good understanding of your films characteristics by ditching the densitometer and printing step wedges.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I think you’re on the right track.

Check out Paul Wainwright’s “Use Your Eyes” essay. He suggests that you can get a very good understanding of your films characteristics by ditching the densitometer and printing step wedges.

You need to be shooting 4x5 for that method to work. OP shoots 35mm. And you still need a meter.

 

[aconbere]

You need to be shooting 4x5 for that method to work. OP shoots 35mm. And you still need a meter.

It wasn’t my impression that OP was against the use of a meter in all cases, just that they were not feeling inclined to always be uptight about it (maybe I’m wrong, in which case it would be very hard to get the kind of consistency required to make good use of any part of the zone system with Sunny 16).

But this method is actually totally applicable to 35… if you’re willing to throw film and time at the problem. Just make your own step wedge by shooting frames up through the aperture of the lens. I’ve done it this way with 120 for a class and I found it to be a complete waste of time and resources, but still doable!

 

[boring old man]

I thought he meant internal camera meter, as opposed to spot meter. You can get a personal EI that way, for average scenes anyway. Sunny 16 is probably to inconsistent to be of any good though. Unless you have changeable backs, it's real hard to do full zone system.

 

[aconbere]

I thought he meant internal camera meter, as opposed to spot meter. You can get a personal EI that way, for average scenes anyway. Sunny 16 is probably to inconsistent to be of any good though. Unless you have changeable backs, it's real hard to do full zone system.

I think it’s tough with anything but sheet film. Although I’ve know folks who traveled with a N-1, N, and N+1 backs.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have no idea why you are calling this the zone system, it has nothing to with the zone system. The ZS is about visualization, without the core concept of visualization, the ability to visualize a scene in black and white determine the shadows and highlight, expose for the shadow and develop for the highlights. In the 60s I took the 10 day workshop with Minor White, his method was slightly different from AA, but with both spent the first couple of days learning to see using the 10 zones of black and and white as developed by AA and Fred Archer. I have no gripes with your system if it gets you the results you want, but it has nothing to do with the ZS, lazy persons or not.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I’ve done it this way with 120 for a class and I found it to be a complete waste of time and resources

Pretty much my point. The shortcut OP wants to take will actually complicate his life. Reason is OP wants to take a shortcut where none exists. There's no "EZ" anything in film photography.

 

[MattKing]

I have no idea why you are calling this the zone system, it has nothing to with the zone system. The ZS is about visualization, without the core concept of visualization, the ability to visualize a scene in black and white determine the shadows and highlight, expose for the shadow and develop for the highlights. In the 60s I took the 10 day workshop with Minor White, his method was slightly different from AA, but with both spent the first couple of days learning to see using the 10 zones of black and and white as developed by AA and Fred Archer. I have no gripes with your system if it gets you the results you want, but it has nothing to do with the ZS, lazy persons or not.

Yep.

 

[MattKing]

There's no "EZ" anything in film photography.

Instamatic 104s to the contrary .
The system mentioned is, of course, an attempt to make personal refinements to one's results. It would be of no value without employing a meter as well. And the benefits to be gained from it would likely only be enjoyed by an experienced user.

 

[GregY]

Pretty much my point. The shortcut OP wants to take will actually complicate his life. Reason is OP wants to take a shortcut where none exists. There's no "EZ" anything in film photography.

Thank You Alex

 

[GregY]

I have no idea why you are calling this the zone system, it has nothing to with the zone system. The ZS is about visualization, without the core concept of visualization, the ability to visualize a scene in black and white determine the shadows and highlight, expose for the shadow and develop for the highlights. In the 60s I took the 10 day workshop with Minor White, his method was slightly different from AA, but with both spent the first couple of days learning to see using the 10 zones of black and and white as developed by AA and Fred Archer. I have no gripes with your system if it gets you the results you want, but it has nothing to do with the ZS, lazy persons or not.

This!

 

[dcy]

How about you keep the light meter and ditch the EZ Zone System and all the testing? I honestly don't understand what you're trying to get at. What's the point in trying to find your film's ISO if you're not going to use a light meter?

The point of finding the film's ISO is set the ISO dial on the camera. I suppose that technically that means that I am still using a light meter (the camera's) but it's the one in an automatic camera. I do not consciously meter the scene and then set the aperture and shutter speed. Instead, I set the film ISO and mostly trust the camera to meter correctly.

If you're saying that every frame of the same film developed in the same developer will always need the same time under the enlarger, you're in for a surprise.

Actually... Yeah... I was hoping it would be the same for most scenes.

 

[Milpool]

It’s quite EZ to make technically excellent negatives. However there are many long cuts one can take.

 

[dcy]

I thought he meant internal camera meter, as opposed to spot meter.

Yes. Thank you. That's what I meant.

 

[dcy]

I have no idea why you are calling this the zone system, it has nothing to with the zone system.

Sorry. I called it that because John Finch titled his video series "EZ Zone System".

 

[Milpool]

Yes. Thank you. That's what I meant.

It takes some practice / experience to see the way the exposure meter sees but it’s pretty straight forward. Other than that the film does the work. Then it’s up to you to do the work under the enlarger or in Photoshop etc.

Don’t sweat it.

 

[dcy]

The system mentioned is, of course, an attempt to make personal refinements to one's results. It would be of no value without employing a meter as well. And the benefits to be gained from it would likely only be enjoyed by an experienced user.

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

 

[MattKing]

No apologies necessary about your choice of title.
John Finch shouldn't get off so easy.

 

[Paul Howell]

In this case set up a ring around, rather than a generic middle gray, from The Zone System for 35mm Photographers white swath of cloth, black swath of cloth, light skinned model and dark skin if possible both, and a gray card. In open shade shoot at lowest ISO you camera will allow, then shoot a frame, space a frame, then next ISO until you max out the camera, shoot an empty frame between each ISO. Then develop at recommended time for tested film. Print a contact sheet, start with your normal time for previous well exposed negative. What you are looking for is texture in the black cloth (zone III) and zone V on the gray card, if you have a dark skinned model skin tone should fall in zone IV. Note the ISO for that frame, then look at the white swath, if dull and gray then you need to increase deveopmenmt time, if blown hight without texture then reduce developer time. It may take a few rolls to find the best development time. At point you have a working ISO for flm and developer combo that will print zone III to zone VII, the zones with details from shadows to highlight. Then to move a zone up or down you can use VC filters.

 

[MattKing]

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

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?

 

[mshchem]

Incident light meter is how I avoid all the anguish

B+W filters are the biggest lever for me, i.e. yellow, red, green etc.

Whatever works is cool!!

 

[GregY]

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

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?