How do YOU "Expose for the Shadows" (without a spot meter)

[Paul Howell]

Paul,

I would follow if you started a thread where all you do is tell the stories about your seminar with Minor White.


I joke about getting this as a tattoo…. It’s Minor White’s mystic cycle of photographic communication.

I was not one of his favorites. I was an anthropology major with a minor in photojournalism. My college did not have photography as art major and only offered photojournalism as a minor as my college (LaVern College) offered in a journalism major. I never understood why but LaVern had a grant to send a student to one of the Summer seminars. I was picked because I had a old exNavy Speed Graphic. The school did have a 5X7 portrait cameras that dated back the 20s which was too big for anyone to lug to MIT. When I showed up with my speed, equipped with a Kodak 127mm which not cover much movement Mr. White was not amused. He approve my of Weston Ranger 9 meter. I did learn a lot, how to test my film and developer comb, how to shoot a ring around and use a densitometer. I did get the hang of visualization, what White called previsalization but never really got the deeper level of his vision as photography as art.

I checked the current class offering at LaVern, no University of LaVern, photojournalism is no longer offered, but a degree in photography is.

 

[BHuij]

Then what do you do with the shadow reading? Do you set the camera to match the meter reading, or do you stop down by some amount? And is your meter set to the film ISO or something else?

Barring special circumstances, I place my shadows on zone IV. So I stop down one stop from what the meter says for the shadow area.

I have calibrated my go-to film stocks and developer combos for printing at grade 2, and the developers I use tend to rob some film speed. So I rate FP4+ at 64 and HP5+ at 250. Meter is set to that calibrated speed, not box speed.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Barring special circumstances, I place my shadows on zone IV. So I stop down one stop from what the meter says for the shadow area.

I have calibrated my go-to film stocks and developer combos for printing at grade 2, and the developers I use tend to rob some film speed. So I rate FP4+ at 64 and HP5+ at 250. Meter is set to that calibrated speed, not box speed.

thank you

 

[runswithsizzers]

Look at your hand's palm in and against the scene you want to shoot and, keeping in mind you hand is about a 'V' on the the zone system scale, look for a similar value of light falling onto the scene, then guess the number of stops needed to get shadow detail to where you want it to lay.

I have often seen recommendations to add one stop, or 2/3rds stop, to a palm reading. That is, isn't the palm of ones hand closer to Zone VI than Zone V??

You might also try making some disks of smooth, white styrofoam plate bottoms, for placing into Series filter holders which you can pre-expose film frames at about 10 - 20% of your final exposure, making first the pre-exposure, removing the filter, which the lens exposed at infinity focusing, recocking the camera with the frame held in place for the double exposure.

Why would I do that?

 

[usesfilmleaders]

We have all often heard the advice to "expose for the shadows" when shooting negative film. But I expect there may be some variation in the exact methods we use. Please include the following: Do you use box ISO or do you set your meter to some other EI? What kind of meter do you use? Where exactly do you aim the meter? After you take your meter reading, how do you set the camera?

My usual metering method is to take an incident reading following the instructions provided by Gossen or Sekonic - so I don't have much experience with metering for the shadows.
But if I wanted to meter for the shadows, I would do it something like this:

1. I usually set my meter to some EI slightly less than box speed: for most ISO 400 film from Kodak or Ilford, I would set my meter to EI 320 or 250. I usually develop in XTOL, which is said to be speed preserving.

2. I would choose something in my scene which I think should be in Zone 3 - say a shaded tree trunk that has some bark texture I want to preserve.

3. Using either my camera's built in meter (simple center weighted TTL), or one of my hand-held meters, I would take a reflected reading from the shaded tree trunk.

4. I would reduce the meter reading by two stops, and set the camera to that value.

I shoot 35mm film, so I don't mess with any kind of notes about contrast range or plus/minus developing - the whole roll unavoidably gets the same development.

It is Step 3 that I am particularly wondering about. I have heard some photographers would either take an incident reading in the shade - or take a reflected reading from a gray card in the same light (shade) as the zone 3 shadow. Pros and Cons?

My search engine seems to not like me today. There used to be a website hosted by a well known and respected photographer called "The Ultimate Guide to the Human Exposure Meter" or something like that. It explained in great detail how to do exactly what you are hoping to do. There is also the "black cat exposure guide", it also is a great way to teach how to read the light.

 

[Mike Lopez]

I have often seen recommendations to add one stop, or 2/3rds stop, to a palm reading. That is, isn't the palm of ones hand closer to Zone VI than Zone V??

Why would I do that?

For lots of white folks, their palms are closer to VI than they are to V. But not everyone has the same skin pigmentation.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Yes,whatever you do,don't underexpose the shadows and always err on the side of over exposure

I have many negatives that attest to my "Meter the shadows and then, er <brain fog sets in>, oh yeah, open up 3 stops" method. Old age comes to us all. Really great shadow detail; highlight contrast, not so much. Thank you, TMX, for your excellent tolerance to overexposure.

 

[chrdamo]

I can only comment on what I've been doing recently, and it's not scientific in the least. One example - I was out this past weekend with a cloudless sky and early afternoon sun photographing buildings. I metered an area in direct sun that would be close to a middle value (whatever you want to call it zone or otherwise) and metered an area in shadow that would be similar. Even with the subject a distance from my position, direct sun is the same in either place and so should shadows so I can take a reflective meter reading from almost anywhere. I found there was only 2 stops between them so I chose an exposure 1 stop less than the shadow value. Any highlights in the scene should be well within the capability of the film so I didn't worry about them. N+/- development doesn't concern me so I develop as I would normally and I end up with easily printable negatives. I don't find that it makes that much of a difference from using a camera with a built-in meter unless the scene would easily fool a meter like backlighting, very bright or dark subject or extreme contrast.

 

[pentaxuser]

You might also try making some disks of smooth, white styrofoam plate bottoms, for placing into Series filter holders which you can pre-expose film frames at about 10 - 20% of your final exposure, making first the pre-exposure, removing the filter, which the lens exposed at infinity focusing, recocking the camera with the frame held in place for the double exposure.

Like runswithsizzers I am also interested in what the above procedure is for?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

Pre-flashing film

I understand that pre-flashing film can sometimes result in an increase in film speed. By "pre-flashing" I mean giving the film a little bit of exposure before taking a picture, with that extra bit of exposure spread evenly over the film. It is also my understanding that what it does is give a...

www.photrio.com

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Then what do you do with the shadow reading? Do you set the camera to match the meter reading, or do you stop down by some amount? And is your meter set to the film ISO or something else?

The whole idea of basing your exposure on a shadow reading is to "place" the shadow where you want it by choosing the exposure that will render the desired detail and tonal relationships in that area. This can vary from situation to situation.

The classic Zone System placement is for a "detailed black" (think a black cat or suit in which you can still see contours, wrinkles, hairs, etc.). That placement is usually two stops underexposed from the meter reading. This placement is a good guideline and starting point.

However, as we mature in visualization, we often want our important shadow area (the one we're basing exposure on) to look different. Sometimes we want it a more featureless black, in which case we place it in Zone II (three stops under from the meter reading) or even Zone I (four stops under). Or, we want a more luminous shadow, in which case we place it in Zone IV (one stop under the meter reading). For shadows on white snow, I'll often place the shadow in Zone V.

All this, of course, depends on visualizing how you want the final result to look and knowing what to do to get what you want (i.e., having tested to find your ideal E.I. and development time(s), etc.

As for metering itself: most of us Zone System users have a meter with a handy sticker added that allows one to simply place the EV value from your meter directly opposite the Zone you want the value placed in. That means no figuring how many stops to underexpose from the meter reading (not that this latter is that difficult ). No need to fiddle with exposure compensation or changing ISO from shot to shot.

All of the above works best for sheet film and using a hand-held spot meter. That's what I do. Using sheet film also allows one to choose different development schemes depending on the contrast desired. This isn't very practical with roll film. With roll film it's better to find a "normal" (N) development that works for everything. Contrast in the print is then controlled with paper grade / VC paper or in post.

When I get a small-format camera with a built-in meter in hand, I meter entirely differently than I do when using sheet film and a hand-held meter. I simply use the exposure the meter suggests (after having tested to get an E.I. that gives me the shadow detail I want for normal scenes when I do that). With many cameras, this exposure is automatically set. This means that I'll get the shadow detail I need in every scene that doesn't fool the meter. Where the meter gets fooled is when the scene is very contrasty, especially if the meter is averaging all the values. In this case, the meter can choose a "middle value" to expose for that will severely underexpose the shadows. This is when to use exposure compensation and add an extra stop or two of exposure. You simply learn to recognize contrasty situations and add exposure. Note that for flat, low-contrast scenes you don't need to do anything. Yes, the shadows might be a bit overexposed if your meter is choosing a middle value, but that's no problem. Contrast is then expanded in the darkroom with paper contrast, etc.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Pre-flashing film (or post-flashing = same effect) doesn't really speed up your film. What you're doing is slightly fogging the film to at, or just below, the exposure threshold, thereby making the lowest exposures more likely to register on the film. This can give you gratifyingly more shadow detail but comes at the expense of separation in the lowest values.

Pre-flashing a straight-toe film can make it behave more like a film with a more curved toe.

Using uncoated lenses or having lots of random in-camera flare can do much the same as pre-flashing. There are photographers that like uncoated lenses just because "the render the shadows so nicely." Some careful workers actually use different E.I.s for coated and uncoated lenses.

Pre-flashing in a situation with a large SBR (or SLR if you prefer) will slightly lessen the distance between lowest and highest values, so can help a bit. Couple that with pre-flashing your paper and you might have a nice print. Or, you can end up with a print with muddy shadows and highlights...

Best,

Doremus

 

[runswithsizzers]

[...]

When I get a small-format camera with a built-in meter in hand, I meter entirely differently than I do when using sheet film and a hand-held meter. I simply use the exposure the meter suggests (after having tested to get an E.I. that gives me the shadow detail I want for normal scenes when I do that). With many cameras, this exposure is automatically set. This means that I'll get the shadow detail I need in every scene that doesn't fool the meter. Where the meter gets fooled is when the scene is very contrasty, especially if the meter is averaging all the values. In this case, the meter can choose a "middle value" to expose for that will severely underexpose the shadows. This is when to use exposure compensation and add an extra stop or two of exposure. You simply learn to recognize contrasty situations and add exposure. Note that for flat, low-contrast scenes you don't need to do anything. Yes, the shadows might be a bit overexposed if your meter is choosing a middle value, but that's no problem. Contrast is then expanded in the darkroom with paper contrast, etc.

Best,

Doremus

Thanks for that explanation. Very helpful.

 

[Vaughn]

Getting good shadow detail on the negative gives one the option of printing that detail, or not. If you do not have the detail in the negative, one no longer has that option...which some people may not want/need.

When I aim for 'Getting good shadow detail on the negative', I still look for shadow areas that will only have texture, and those areas that will have zilch. I work with those areas just as importantly as where the high lights fall and where I'll develop them to.

For me, 'Getting good shadow detail on the negative' is a subjective, not an objective, goal. Zone terminology is just a tool I use to visualize and work with the process.

 

[Trask]

Reading through this thread make me realize that there is a couple of different ways I think about using a meter.
One of those ways, and I think the way that the OP was asking about, is the way where we point the meter (or camera) at something, and then make use of the results to set the camera. That is the most common approach, and usually works fine. That approach leads to the questions about where to point the meter/camera and how to interpret the results. Those are good questions.
The other way is a bit more complex. You can use the meter to learn about your subject, and help you visualize how it might be rendered in a photographic print or projected slide or .... Also, you can use that information to consciously decide what result you would like, and how to achieve it. Decisions like high key, full range of tones, or low key results. Empty shadows or brilliant highlights.
So you take a shadow reading, and take a mid-tone reading, and take a highlight reading, and it tells you a lot about how those parts are likely to relate to each other in the negative (or transparency). If the subject has a high Subject Luminance Range ("SLR"), you may decide to make an exposure decision that favours shadows or mid-tones or highlights, accepting the fact that tones at one or both ends of the range may be deleteriously affected. Exposing for the shadows may be a way of referring to such a "shadow favouring" decision.
Those investigations may also lead to efforts to modify the SLR - things like using reflectors, fill-flash, in some cases filters and the old reliable choice of leaving and coming back when the light is better.

One reason I like the Canon T90 is that it has spot metering that allows the photographer to take up to 9 spot readings that the camera will integrate into a final exposure setting. So one can meter a highlight and then a shadow area, then add a mid-tone, then take another highlight or shadow reading to shift the final exposure a bit one way or another -- like adding more or less salt to your steak.

 

[eli griggs]

I have often seen recommendations to add one stop, or 2/3rds stop, to a palm reading. That is, isn't the palm of ones hand closer to Zone VI than Zone V??

Why would I do that?

For better shadow detail.

Look up pre-exposure or 'flashing' both for B&W darkroom paper and B&W negatives.

The styrofoam filter can also be used to turn a camera's reflective meter into an incidental meter, for measuring light falling onto your subjects.

By the way, overexposure by a stop is pretty much a standard operating procedure for many B&W photographers.

Search these pages to read more.

Also, I've found that under rating colour negative films by 1/3 stop results in better exposures and saturated colours.

 

[eli griggs]

Like runswithsizzers I am also interested in what the above procedure is for?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Same answer, for better shadows and reading a scene, without a spot or any meter, using F16.

 

[CMoore]

We have all often heard the advice to "expose for the shadows" when shooting negative film. But I expect there may be some variation in the exact methods we use. Please include the following: Do you use box ISO or do you set your meter to some other EI? What kind of meter do you use? Where exactly do you aim the meter? After you take your meter reading, how do you set the camera?

My usual metering method is to take an incident reading following the instructions provided by Gossen or Sekonic - so I don't have much experience with metering for the shadows.
But if I wanted to meter for the shadows, I would do it something like this:

1. I usually set my meter to some EI slightly less than box speed: for most ISO 400 film from Kodak or Ilford, I would set my meter to EI 320 or 250. I usually develop in XTOL, which is said to be speed preserving.

2. I would choose something in my scene which I think should be in Zone 3 - say a shaded tree trunk that has some bark texture I want to preserve.

3. Using either my camera's built in meter (simple center weighted TTL), or one of my hand-held meters, I would take a reflected reading from the shaded tree trunk.

4. I would reduce the meter reading by two stops, and set the camera to that value.

I shoot 35mm film, so I don't mess with any kind of notes about contrast range or plus/minus developing - the whole roll unavoidably gets the same development.

It is Step 3 that I am particularly wondering about. I have heard some photographers would either take an incident reading in the shade - or take a reflected reading from a gray card in the same light (shade) as the zone 3 shadow. Pros and Cons?

35mm in my case

Nothing fancy for me.
Pretty much the advice a teacher gives to a student in a beginner class................. a reflective meter on the darkest area that will show some detail.
Shooting box speed i would then close down 2 stops.

.

 

[runswithsizzers]

35mm in my case

Nothing fancy for me.
Pretty much the advice a teacher gives to a student in a beginner class................. a reflective meter on the darkest area that will show some detail.
Shooting box speed i would then close down 2 stops.

.

Thank you.

 

[Drew B.]

Your phone.

 

[chrdamo]

One reason I like the Canon T90 is that it has spot metering that allows the photographer to take up to 9 spot readings that the camera will integrate into a final exposure setting. So one can meter a highlight and then a shadow area, then add a mid-tone, then take another highlight or shadow reading to shift the final exposure a bit one way or another -- like adding more or less salt to your steak.
Download Adobe Photoshop Express Mod APK

 

[redbandit]

s

We have all often heard the advice to "expose for the shadows" when shooting negative film. But I expect there may be some variation in the exact methods we use. Please include the following: Do you use box ISO or do you set your meter to some other EI? What kind of meter do you use? Where exactly do you aim the meter? After you take your meter reading, how do you set the camera?

My usual metering method is to take an incident reading following the instructions provided by Gossen or Sekonic - so I don't have much experience with metering for the shadows.
But if I wanted to meter for the shadows, I would do it something like this:

1. I usually set my meter to some EI slightly less than box speed: for most ISO 400 film from Kodak or Ilford, I would set my meter to EI 320 or 250. I usually develop in XTOL, which is said to be speed preserving.

2. I would choose something in my scene which I think should be in Zone 3 - say a shaded tree trunk that has some bark texture I want to preserve.

3. Using either my camera's built in meter (simple center weighted TTL), or one of my hand-held meters, I would take a reflected reading from the shaded tree trunk.

4. I would reduce the meter reading by two stops, and set the camera to that value.

I shoot 35mm film, so I don't mess with any kind of notes about contrast range or plus/minus developing - the whole roll unavoidably gets the same development.

It is Step 3 that I am particularly wondering about. I have heard some photographers would either take an incident reading in the shade - or take a reflected reading from a gray card in the same light (shade) as the zone 3 shadow. Pros and Cons

step 4 is how you take a photograph of an object or person in a backlit area.

According to beyond monochrome? you would simple turn the cameras metering system on, and adjust the aperture and shutter speed on the DARKEST shadow you want to have something appear in.
ie your in a library, you pop the camera meter over to the book case with the darkest shadows THAT YOU WANT TO SEE BOOKS IN,, and take readings off of that.

Then i would personally bracket.

 

[snusmumriken]

s


step 4 is how you take a photograph of an object or person in a backlit area.

According to beyond monochrome? you would simple turn the cameras metering system on, and adjust the aperture and shutter speed on the DARKEST shadow you want to have something appear in.
ie your in a library, you pop the camera meter over to the book case with the darkest shadows THAT YOU WANT TO SEE BOOKS IN,, and take readings off of that.

Then i would personally bracket.

No, @runswithsizzers was right. His meter is trying to make the tree trunk mid-grey. He wants it to be a shadow, therefore he should give it less exposure. Two stops less makes it a shadow with discernible detail.

With your method you will get the trunk as a mid-tone, creating dense negatives (potentially a pain to print or scan), and risking over-exposed highlights. That could be why you find you have to bracket?

With a back-lit (and mid-tone) subject, you either need to meter off the subject excluding the backlight; or take an incident reading from the subject's position pointing the meter at the camera position; or accept the meter reading from the camera viewpoint and add a couple of stops, i.e. the opposite to the OP's step 4.

 

[albada]

Two stops less makes it a shadow with discernible detail.

Expanding on this statement a little, Ansel Adams found that:

• two stops less is a shadow with "adequate" detail (zone 3),
• three stops less is a shadow with barely visible detail (zone 2).

When metering a shadow, you can lose two to three stops, depending on how much detail you want in the shadow.

 

[Steve@f8]

Reflected metering off a mid tone, such as grass, then open 1 or 2 stops?