B&W film general use for students?

[Juan Valdenebro]

How would you describe -briefly- a system that works for different contrast scenes mixed in the same roll? Not for scanning, but for darkroom printing…

Let me explain. For many years I found incident metering under direct sunlight worked perfectly for slide film, as well as sunny f/16 rule, but as both produced underexposure for B&W film, my system -for sun- was simply testing beforehand, and then just writing notes down and knowing which f-stop and speed were right for common strong sunlight. Of course with some variations for every scene because even if sunlight is more or less the same, shadows do vary…

Some weeks ago Photrio forum member Lachlan Young taught me the right way of thinking, again for direct sunlight, was relating sunny exposures to the shadows, and not to direct sunlight… I was shocked! Instantly it seemed right to me before trying it, because my own values were several stops far from direct sunlight metering, so closer to shadows values, and it also made sense because incident metering works very well for soft light, so, metering the soft light areas in sunny scenes -the areas of shadows- would then be part of the same type of metering in the same soft type of light…

Immediately after reading Lachlan’s words I read -maybe Photrio forum member Matt King- about B&W film being designed precisely to allow photographers use the same roll of film for soft and harsh scenes, printing them perfectly with different MG filters… I used to think that was not a good option… When I was 20 in the 90’s I first learnt with the AA books, so my mind grew up believing that was not possible: I guess the old master had in mind the materials of his youth, but MG papers of today are amazing…

After Lachlan’s and Matt’s words I thought: if that is possible, it would seem that my mind map has been kind of very very wrong: I had always imagined film required shorter and longer development times that were strongly different for sun and overcast… So, if as Matt said, a middle point both in development and in EI was a real possibility, it would only be true if short and long development times for high and normal contrast were not as far one from another as my mind map had thought for many years…

So I took my recent years development notes, and tried to see if those two types of development for different contrast scenes, for the same film, were possibly not as different as I had always imagined… It wasn’t easy because my notes showed all kinds of very different times collected through years, and my notes were never organized per film: it was all mixed, but then I saw what made my mind clear: there was a Tri-X time for overcast, 11 minutes, and in another part of my notebook I found another Tri-X time, for direct sunlight, and it was 11 minutes too, so I turned back my pages anxiously looking for the previous 11 minutes page, thinking: these two times MUST have -for sure- very different temperature to be able to do those two very different types of develoment using both of them 11 minutes… Then, I saw both times were not only equal, but they also showed exactly the same temperature! I was amazed!

The only differences between my own optimal time for overcast, and my own optimal time for sun, was that the soft light one was EI500 1+1, 4 inversions per minute, while the sunny scenes required EI320 1+1.5, 2 inversions per minute… Not too different! All my life I had wrongly imagined both things were a lot more distant! Both procedures were indeed close!

Then I suddenly was a believer; I thought: then it’s true using a middle point EI (400) and also in between dilution and agitation, it is indeed possible that MG filters take good care of both type of scenes even if they receive the same development…

Sorry for the long explanation.

Of course I went out and started tests with a whole new mind, respecting good old box speed for the first time… My incident metering for soft light was already fine, so I was interested mostly in sunny scenes. I decided to test placing shadows in a bracketing style… It’s often said place shadows in zone 3, so I placed them at half-stop increments from zone 2 to zone 5, just in case… Darkroom contact prints showed me -with filter 2- my shadows were close to what I like, clean, when placed not in zone 3 but in zone 4, but I really liked them when placed in zone 5! If I place shadows in zone 3, there’s detail for sure, but they’re dark… Placing shadows in zone 5, places highlights too high for contrasty scenes, and that requires too short development times, what tends to produce softish tonal separation apart from easily blocked highlights...

Then I remembered I once read (Matt King again?) something like “some photographers don’t want to accept we really need to burn in highlights if we want decent tonal separation…”

So, having in mind mixed scenes in the same roll, how would you describe your own general system if you needed to teach a group of young students, and in particular, how do you meter under direct sunlight, and where do you place shadows? Do you meter at box speed for mixed scenes? Have you found a system that's good for direct prints, or do you burn highlights all the time when you print sunny scenes?

Thanks a lot for your comments!

 

[Danner]

Meter the deepest shadows where you still want texture and details to show, and then under-expose that reading by two stops. In Ansel Adams' terms, put the shadows in Zone III.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Meter the deepest shadows where you still want texture and details to show, and then under-expose that reading by two stops. In Ansel Adams' terms, put the shadows in Zone III.

Shadows are too dark then, even if they have some detail. That doesn't work for scenes where subjects in the shadows are as important as subjects under direct sunlight.
Thanks.

 

[markjwyatt]

Shadows are too dark then, even if they have some detail. That doesn't work for scenes where subjects in the shadows are as important as subjects under direct sunlight.
Thanks.

The next step would be to compress the dynamic range through modification of development so the sunlit subject ends up in say zone VII. I am not an expert in the Zone System, but I have stayed at the Holiday Inn Express many times.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

The next step would be to compress the dynamic range through modification of development so the sunlit subject ends up in say zone VII. I am not an expert in the Zone System, but I have stayed at the Holiday Inn Express many times.

Highlights are not too complicated: MG filters and development time can control them. What seems decisive, is what we do with shadows... And that includes deciding an EI, and metering in a precise, repetitive way, to place shadows the same way always... So it looks like EI, way of metering, and shadows placing, are the three main questions here...

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I'm thinking of this type of answers:
a) In case of mixed scenes in the same roll, for overcast I use incident metering at box speed, and for sun I meter the shadows at box speed too, and place them in zone 4, and that gives me clean shadows...
or
b) In case of mixed scenes in the same roll, for overcast I use incident metering a third above box speed (500 for ISO400 film), and for sun I meter the shadows with an incident meter two thirds below box speed (250 for ISO400 film) and place them in zone 4, and that gives me clean shadows.
or
c) In case of mixed scenes in the same roll, for overcast I use incident metering two thirds above box speed (640 for ISO400 film), and for sun I use box speed and place the shadows in zone 4, but it's always necessary to burn highlights in, to be able to develop enough as to have both good separation for soft scenes, and really open shadows for harsh scenes...

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Wouldn't that kind of brief lesson be optimal for young students?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Juan, maybe I am asking a stupid question: but the goal of this exercise to achieve maximum compression? I mean none of this matters if crushed shadows or blown out highlights are desirable?

The goal is describing the photographic system.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I’m concerned with the tonality of the print, and printing is the stage at which we have most of the real control. I use a spot meter, expose the film to make sure I’ve captured what I need in the darkest areas, and usually develop normally regardless of the exposure range.

I would not really suggest minus or plus development or alternative EIs to a student, or anyone else for that matter. It is mostly counter-productive. Focus on printing.

Hi Michael, glad to see you here...
So you meter overcast light with an incident meter at box speed, I guess...
And what do you meter in sunny scenes, shadows? At box speed too?
And how do you place those metered shadows?
After this, I'll ask you a little bit about the printing stage...
Thank you!

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I think Michael is right as usual: after making the film register all we can, it's the printing stage what makes it or kills it...
Could we define, again in a general and brief way, the differences about what in the printing stage we do for soft scenes and what we do for sunny scenes, when both come from the same roll?
Thanks everyone...

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Thank you, Michael...
I think I can capture info on film in a decent way, and I can also work a bit in the darkroom to make prints look, again, at least decent... But even if I can talk about some kind of system for good film exposure and development, I'm not an expert printer as to diferentiate -in public- systems for soft and harsh light negatives from the same roll if we talk about the printing stage.
I have a lot to learn there... I'd be glad to hear someone talk about that!
Good night and thank you.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I’m concerned with the tonality of the print, and printing is the stage at which we have most of the real control. I use a spot meter, expose the film to make sure I’ve captured what I need in the darkest areas, and usually develop normally regardless of the exposure range.

I would not really suggest minus or plus development or alternative EIs to a student, or anyone else for that matter. It is mostly counter-productive. Focus on printing. Not only printing technique/skill, but thought, time and work. It can take work to make a great print.

That's not far off how I see it too - though I feel pretty strongly that the particular type of meter used doesn't really matter (other than whatever metaphysical properties its operator perceives from the usage of a particular type) anything like as much as understanding how to use it to key for the deepest shadow you want detail in - and everything else follows really very automatically from there, with little need to tweak processing until at a pretty advanced level. I also think that people tend to attach too much emphasis on printing being notionally 'difficult'/ slow to learn - all too often I've found it's really because of a combination of wayward exposures & processing, usually driven by unknowing trips into zone system weeds (or other similar undergrowth) - and/ or poor quality teaching around when to raise/ lower print exposure & grade.

I'd also like to mention to Juan & anybody reading this thread that I don't think I said anything that isn't essentially covered by most well informed publications/ books that cover the basics of sensitometry. If it helps people to get less distracted into irrelevant aspects of technique & instead lets them expend their energies on making meaningful work (and hopefully some good prints thereof), then that's hopefully a positive outcome!

 

[MattKing]

If you are talking about general use for students, I think you need to step back a bit.
You really want them to obtain a reasonable percentage of usable negatives.
Concentrating on shadow exposure is fine, but most of the information in a photo resides between the higher shadows, and lower highlights, with the most important stuff right in the mid-tones.
A film with a decently accessible and long straight section in the middle of the characteristic curve is good for students. A forgiving toe, and a rewarding shoulder is good too.
I'd suggest something well known and easily accessed and well supported - Tri-X, HP5+, maybe T-Max 400.
Get them to use simple, reflective metering or incident metering, and get them to observe how prints look, making a point of correlating the look off the print and the characteristics of the light.

 

[markjwyatt]

For "walking around photography" I shoot box speed and develop (or recent past send to labs) as such. I account for recommended filter factors (typically med or deep yellow). I may use sunny 16, knowing I will lose some shadows. If I want more shadow details, I may open 1/2 -1 stop. If I meter through the lens I know I am under exposing 1/3-1/2 stop with med-deep yellow (and at least a full stop with 25A), plus w/sunny-16 my shutter speed available @ f16 may under or over expose 1/4-1/3 stop, so considering all that I adjust relative to shadow situation. If I feel shadows are really important, and I have time and access to the shadows, I may go and take some meter readings and figure the best way to balance. If I don't have time (say a "decisive moment" is about to occur), I may open up more, but realize I may start compromising the highlights. Not all of this needs to happen for every shot. As the situation remains more or less the same, I only need to consider changes, rather than all these factors. As I am "walking around" I constantly check to see where I am relative to baseline meter reading and/or sunny-16, and thus hopefully be prepared for the next shot and any adjustments needed.

If I am trying to be more precise, I will use both incident and reflected meter readings to assess the full situation (and try and reconcile the two to within 1/3-1/2 a stop, which helps me assess the lighting). This is less "walking around" photography. Outside of really clear sunny-16 scenarios I depend more on the meter and tend to use reflected metering the most.

 

[grain elevator]

If your students are relatively new to this, I wouldn't bother them with any consideration of scene contrast, nor shadows placement. Just teach them reflected metering and an "exposure compensation" way of thinking first - that may already be challenging.
Regarding your own new understanding of metering, I want to emphasize that "shadows" in photo speak needn't be shadows. It just means dark tones or dark parts of a scene. It could well be that what you want as highlights in your picture is in the shade, part of a shadow of something. Doesn't mean it needs to be placed in zones 2-4. People seem to have different understandings of this, and if what constitutes the darkest details that should be differentiated, and that seems to one reason why the zone placement of "shadows" is so contentious.

 

[Craig75]

Meter it, take the shot, print it.

A simple system that has worked for 100 years now.

 

[relistan]

Be careful about saying I’m right... I’m sure plenty of people would say I am wrong as usual.

I personally read what you write with a lot of interest because so much thought and prep usually backs your views. You’ve been really helpful to me and others.

@Juan Valdenebro I take a bit less technical approach and as everyone else says it’s just what I do. I generally shoot outside and use a reflective meter (Gossen Lunasix 3) and aim the meter toward the sky and the ground and any large dark areas. Then in my head I just average the exposure reading based on the importance in the scene. When in doubt, I over expose one stop. Very occasionally I use the incident meter feature, usually when doing outdoor portraits. In that case I average the incident and reflective reading from the subject. Not too much science, simple meter, but good results.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I've found careless shooting makes horrible negatives... Overcast skies produce -when included in the composition- underexposure ranging from 2 to 9 stops. Yes, nine. Once I was indoors with huge windows behind my subject, and reflected, careless metering was 9 stops off.
And direct sunlight with very dark shadows require thinking too, IMO.
Of course things should be taught step by step.
I also found knowing the light (the four most common levels of light in the street) makes much better rolls when contact printed than metering with camera, for young students.
Technology can help if it's very well used, but if it isn't well used it messes things up.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I mix the whole range of dark and light scenes on a roll of film all the time. I shoot box speed period. If I want more shadow detail I shoot box speed and adjust the exposure using the Zone System for shadow detail. I develop all the film for box speed and the ambient temperature and I have never had a problem.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I mix the whole range of dark and light scenes on a roll of film all the time. I shoot box speed period. If I want more shadow detail I shoot box speed and adjust the exposure using the Zone System for shadow detail. I develop all the film for box speed and the ambient temperature and I have never had a problem.

That sounds fine: a prudent development lets the film record everything, and you have room for more shadows exposure depending on every scene.