Ansel Adams Zone System - skin in shadow

[Jon Richardson]

Hey everyone! I have a pretty straight forward new person to exposure question. I’ve been learning a lot about exposure through using Ansel Adams zone system. (I mostly expose/color video). But lately I’ve been questioning something and I can’t seem to find the answer anywhere:

I understand there are certain zones for “lit skin”, for example I know that on a sunny day an average caucasian skin tone will hit around the 6 mark in sunlight. But what about when someone is in the shade? For example if my subject has half of their face lit by the sunset but they are turned almost profile so that almost all of their face towards camera is in shadow, what zone would that unlit cheek fall under? Or for that matter if their whole face was in shade where would it fall? I’ve been testing a lot of images (photographs and stills from movies) and definitely seeing that the skin falls in a darker place when in shade. But where should it fall? Is there anywhere written out what zone each type of skin should fall under in shade?

thanks so much!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

The point of the zone system is to place subject areas on whatever zone you want. And it all depends on the effect you're after... drama, or natural rendition. How are you metring? Light metre? In camera metre?

 

[BrianShaw]

… and whose skin?

 

[MattKing]

The problem with your question is the word "should".
The Zone where the shadowed skin is either placed or will fall depends entirely on how you want it to appear in the print.
Do you want the shadowed skin to appear bright and luminous, with the brightly lit skin up into the highlight shoulder? Then place the shadowed skin in Zone VI.
Do you want the shadowed skin to appear dark and foreboding, with just a hint of mysterious detail, with the brightly lit skin appearing as a normal midtone, then place the brightly lit skin in Zone VI, and let the shadowed skin fall in Zone II or Zone III.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

He said, caucasian skin...

 

[juan]

Assuming the sun lit skin is VI and standard development, open shade skin would be about IV 1/2 to V. Deeper shade about IV or even a little darker. That’s been my experience in the kind of light I expose in.

 

[BrianShaw]

He said, caucasian skin...

That was merely a data point of prior knowledge. If one is going to wonder about the difference between sunlit and shade, one should also be aware that skin is not skin is not skin… even within the Caucasian race.

 

[Jon Richardson]

Assuming the sun lit skin is VI and standard development, open shade skin would be about IV 1/2 to V. Deeper shade about IV or even a little darker. That’s been my experience in the kind of light I expose in.

that makes sense. So what if the entire Caucasian subject was in shade? Would IV 1/2 to V be a possible choice for landing for the whole face?

 

[BrianShaw]

Not zone system, but have you considered incident light metering?

 

[Jon Richardson]

The problem with your question is the word "should".
The Zone where the shadowed skin is either placed or will fall depends entirely on how you want it to appear in the print.
Do you want the shadowed skin to appear bright and luminous, with the brightly lit skin up into the highlight shoulder? Then place the shadowed skin in Zone VI.
Do you want the shadowed skin to appear dark and foreboding, with just a hint of mysterious detail, with the brightly lit skin appearing as a normal midtone, then place the brightly lit skin in Zone VI, and let the shadowed skin fall in Zone II or Zone III.

This is VERY helpful. So if my Caucasian subject was entirely in shade and I wanted to go for a nice natural under a tree shade look where would that land in your opinion?

 

[Jon Richardson]

Not zone system, but have you considered incident light metering?

Honestly I don’t know much about incident light metering. What is it?

 

[juan]

that makes sense. So what if the entire Caucasian subject was in shade? Would IV 1/2 to V be a possible choice for landing for the whole face?

Then you get into interpretation as others have discussed above. It would be a possible choice. There would also be others.

 

[Jon Richardson]

That was merely a data point of prior knowledge. If one is going to wonder about the difference between sunlit and shade, one should also be aware that skin is not skin is not skin… even within the Caucasian race.

good to know and keep a lookout for! Thanks!

 

[Jon Richardson]

Then you get into interpretation as others have discussed above. It would be a possible choice. There would also be others.

okay! So if I’m understanding right… shade has a lot more room for interpretation and artistic style… whereas fully sunlit faces have a little more of a straightforward place to land (at least following Ansel Adam’s system)?

 

[BrianShaw]

Honestly I don’t know much about incident light metering. What is it?

Here’s some basic (illustrated) information. It’s a really good read that will benefit your metering education:

https://www.sekonic.com/benefits-using-light-metering

 

[Jon Richardson]

Here’s some basic (illustrated) information. It’s a really good read that will benefit your metering education:

https://www.sekonic.com/benefits-using-light-metering

thanks so much!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

That was merely a data point of prior knowledge. If one is going to wonder about the difference between sunlit and shade, one should also be aware that skin is not skin is not skin… even within the Caucasian race.

Yes. There are variations of course. It would be a judgement call on the photographer.

 

[BrianShaw]

Jon, I hesitate to write this in public and hope you don't misinterpret that I'm hoping to help and definitely not intending to be condescending in any way... but my experience over the years is that when someone is asking about metering/exposure using the zone system with no/limited experience with "standard" general-coverage or incident metering they are quite often working against their goal. If not "against", certainly making life more difficult than necessary for the PRACTICAL application of photography.

I'm suggesting that a study/practicum in the "standard" metering techniques would set you up much better for figuring out zone system than starting with zone system. Honestly, over many years of photography I've found that these standard techniques are quite adequate more-often-than-not. In your example, I don't think zone system is the best approach from a practical perspective. Plus, it gives the basic knowledge from which one can exercise "judgement calls" based on photographer experience/knowledge.

If the Zone System enquiry is an educational endeavor... I completely understand... it's a fascinating approach.

BTW, from which "LA" do you hail: Louisiana, Los Angeles, or Lower Alabama?

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Jon,

First, just to clarify, the Zone System with its 9 (or 10) Zones for "normal" was created for black-and-white film and darkroom printing. If you're exposing color, making videos, etc., then your medium is going to have a different potential dynamic range and the standard lists of what luminance subjects "should" be rendered in what Zones won't apply.

Next, the Zone System for b&w is based on "placing" a shadow value where you want it (this means basing your exposure on a shadow value to have it be rendered the tonality you want it in the final print) and then seeing where all the other values "fall." If you don't like where they fall, you can adjust development so they print more easily or rethink your image.

However, many portrait photographers "place" the lit skin tone and let the shadows, etc. "fall" where they may. In this case, the shaded skin value depends on the ratio of lighting between the lit area and the shaded area. In this case, then, you meter the lit skin, place it in Zone VI and then meter the shaded skin to see where it falls. Now if it falls where you don't want it to fall (e.g., in bright sunlight, shaded skin can be really dark), the usual remedy is to light the shadows somehow, either with fill flash or reflector, or filter the main light with, say a diffusing cloth, etc. (or wait for a cloudy day ). In studio settings, the lighting ratio is almost always the determining factor and lighting is adjusted to get shadows and lit areas to balance. In the field, you may be able, with black-and-white materials that is, to work out a scheme of exposure, development and print contrast manipulations to get an overly-contrasty ratio between lit and shaded skin under control to your liking. Still, carrying around that reflector is a really good and simple thing...

Deciding where you want that shaded skin to fall, i.e., how light or dark you want it to be in the final print, is something that the standard lists of what falls in what Zone can only give you guidelines for. Look at portraits, etc. and see what you like. You have to make a decision based on what you want in the final image. Want really luminous shadows? Shoot for Zone V or just a bit less. Want a dark, brooding look? Maybe Zone III or IV. Want that dramatic "Phantom of the Opera" effect? Get those shadows down to Zone I or II.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Jon Richardson]

Jon, I hesitate to write this in public and hope you don't misinterpret that I'm hoping to help and definitely not intending to be condescending in any way... but my experience over the years is that when someone is asking about metering/exposure using the zone system with no/limited experience with "standard" general-coverage or incident metering they are quite often working against their goal. If not "against", certainly making life more difficult than necessary for the PRACTICAL application of photography.

I'm suggesting that a study/practicum in the "standard" metering techniques would set you up much better for figuring out zone system than starting with zone system. Honestly, over many years of photography I've found that these standard techniques are quite adequate more-often-than-not. In your example, I don't think zone system is the best approach from a practical perspective. Plus, it gives the basic knowledge from which one can exercise "judgement calls" based on photographer experience/knowledge.

If the Zone System enquiry is an educational endeavor... I completely understand... it's a fascinating approach.

BTW, from which "LA" do you hail: Louisiana, Los Angeles, or Lower Alabama?

Thanks so much for your honesty. I don’t feel like you are condescending at all! I definitely know my knowledge is limited. Ive learned color grading from Matti Haapaja (you may have seen his videos) and a course he did and he was using Ansel Adams which got me started on that. I need to learn more about incident metering it sounds like. I’ve gotten the impression that incident metering is more what you do when actually TAKING the photos. I’m an editor and mostly work on projects recorded and taken by others… does this skill set still apply to me? Thanks! Oh and I’m in Los Angeles!

 

[MattKing]

I’m an editor and mostly work on projects recorded and taken by others… does this skill set still apply to me?

Probably not - unless you feel you need to know about it in order to communicate with the cinematographer.
All of the Zone System techniques we have been discussing are related to what the "taking" photographer is seeking to do.
So as an example, if the cinemaphotographer was seeking to shoot a scene where the human subject was intended to be essentially silhouetted against the sun, the cinemaphotographer may have intentionally placed the shadowed side of the face into near darkness (Zone II) and you as an editor might want to know that, in order to make editing decisions that support the cinemaphotographer's intention.
Essentially, you are doing as an editor some of what I used to do when I was colour printing for others. In those circumstances, if the negative was accompanied by detailed instructions from the photographer, a note indicating that the shadowed side of the face was intended to be in Zone II, I would have a decent idea what I should do as a printer.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I agree with Brian.

Jon, I hesitate to write this in public and hope you don't misinterpret that I'm hoping to help and definitely not intending to be condescending in any way... but my experience over the years is that when someone is asking about metering/exposure using the zone system with no/limited experience with "standard" general-coverage or incident metering they are quite often working against their goal. If not "against", certainly making life more difficult than necessary for the PRACTICAL application of photography.

I'm suggesting that a study/practicum in the "standard" metering techniques would set you up much better for figuring out zone system than starting with zone system. Honestly, over many years of photography I've found that these standard techniques are quite adequate more-often-than-not. In your example, I don't think zone system is the best approach from a practical perspective. Plus, it gives the basic knowledge from which one can exercise "judgement calls" based on photographer experience/knowledge.

If the Zone System enquiry is an educational endeavor... I completely understand... it's a fascinating approach.

BTW, from which "LA" do you hail: Louisiana, Los Angeles, or Lower Alabama?

As always Doremus states what my thoughts on the Zone System are much better than I can.

Jon,

First, just to clarify, the Zone System with its 9 (or 10) Zones for "normal" was created for black-and-white film and darkroom printing. If you're exposing color, making videos, etc., then your medium is going to have a different potential dynamic range and the standard lists of what luminance subjects "should" be rendered in what Zones won't apply.

Next, the Zone System for b&w is based on "placing" a shadow value where you want it (this means basing your exposure on a shadow value to have it be rendered the tonality you want it in the final print) and then seeing where all the other values "fall." If you don't like where they fall, you can adjust development so they print more easily or rethink your image.

However, many portrait photographers "place" the lit skin tone and let the shadows, etc. "fall" where they may. In this case, the shaded skin value depends on the ratio of lighting between the lit area and the shaded area. In this case, then, you meter the lit skin, place it in Zone VI and then meter the shaded skin to see where it falls. Now if it falls where you don't want it to fall (e.g., in bright sunlight, shaded skin can be really dark), the usual remedy is to light the shadows somehow, either with fill flash or reflector, or filter the main light with, say a diffusing cloth, etc. (or wait for a cloudy day ). In studio settings, the lighting ratio is almost always the determining factor and lighting is adjusted to get shadows and lit areas to balance. In the field, you may be able, with black-and-white materials that is, to work out a scheme of exposure, development and print contrast manipulations to get an overly-contrasty ratio between lit and shaded skin under control to your liking. Still, carrying around that reflector is a really good and simple thing...

Deciding where you want that shaded skin to fall, i.e., how light or dark you want it to be in the final print, is something that the standard lists of what falls in what Zone can only give you guidelines for. Look at portraits, etc. and see what you like. You have to make a decision based on what you want in the final image. Want really luminous shadows? Shoot for Zone V or just a bit less. Want a dark, brooding look? Maybe Zone III or IV. Want that dramatic "Phantom of the Opera" effect? Get those shadows down to Zone I or II.

Best,

Doremus

Also in Los Angeles.

 

[Paul Howell]

As you are editing the value of the Zone System is a standard ruler when discussing with your photographers where you and they think the skin tone or for that matter any object in a given scene should fall, should that house be in zone 7 or 8? I am assuming that you editing digital files and not film.