Correct! The Zone System does not adjust contrast on its own. That is why we use variable contrast paper and sometimes use split grade printing with or without dodging and burning.
For darkroom printing, all one can do is try to get the contrast where the important detail is. There are techniques to optimize the mid tones, and the Zone system on its own doesn't do it.
I don't do digital, but have occasionally played with contrast curves and it is miraculous what can be done sliding contrast up a bit here, down a bit there there...
At the end of the day, the paper only has the range it has. Projected Kodachrome shows what film can capture.
I expose for the shadows and develop normally and that provides the shadow detail that I want.
Alan, If you the detail isn't in your negative.... you can't bring it out in the print. Proper exposure and appropriate development then gives you the basis to use the printing tools at your disposal: different papers (multigrade or graded), choice of developers, dodging/burning, bleaching/toning...... to arrive at the print you 'pre-visualized.' Otherwise it's by guess or by golly as to what your print will turn out like.
Why can I see the shadow details when I scan the film but you can't print them chemically?
scan and print them digitally just to save the shot?
Sure, but if you have areas more than five to seven stops brighter than those shadows that still have important details, your T-Max might preserve detail, but at a density you'll never manage to print in the same exposure as those shadows. If you only scan, a good modern scanner can probably do better than that (I'm not a real scanning expert).
This raises the question. If you can't print them chemically, then wouldn't it pay to scan and print them digitally just to save the shot?
This raises the question. If you can't print them chemically, then wouldn't it pay to scan and print them digitally just to save the shot?
Why can I see the shadow details when I scan the film but you can't print them chemically?
Go sit in the corner and do not come out until you have learned to behave yourself! Also wash you mouth out with lye.
The problem is not with modern film, but the lack of latitude of the paper.
I wonder if the OP has by now made up his mind as to whether a switch to film will confer any advantages to the shadow details in his shots?
If I were an experienced digital shooter and had read all the posts then I rather feel that on balance I'd stick with digital, given the learning and skills required to match, let alone improve on digital shots
Here's an analogy. I race cars for a living and would like to improve my competitive edge on my fellow drivers of the latest similar high tech cars to my own .
No-one can guarantee a switch to an older-technology car will improve my competitiveness but it might. However by the time I learn the different techniques required I may have to accept being less competitive for quite a long period
The risk involved versus the benefit may just be too great for me to want to take
Is that a reasonable analogy?
pentaxuser
I'd say the learning curve appears a bit daunting for sure. I did some reading about zone system, how to develop film and tweak development time to control contrast etc. The underlying principles are quite similar to what's going on in digital via photoshop so its not so difficult to understand for eg N-1, N+1 basically sounds exactly like levels control. Theory is one thing but I can see though how the manual processes may take quite some time. At least I've gained some new appreciation of the principles working behind photoshop. The time commitment makes me less motivated now ... I might sign up for a basic film development class first and go from there.I wonder if the OP has by now made up his mind as to whether a switch to film will confer any advantages to the shadow details in his shots?
If I were an experienced digital shooter and had read all the posts then I rather feel that on balance I'd stick with digital, given the learning and skills required to match, let alone improve on digital shots
Here's an analogy. I race cars for a living and would like to improve my competitive edge on my fellow drivers of the latest similar high tech cars to my own .
No-one can guarantee a switch to an older-technology car will improve my competitiveness but it might. However by the time I learn the different techniques required I may have to accept being less competitive for quite a long period
The risk involved versus the benefit may just be too great for me to want to take
Is that a reasonable analogy?
pentaxuser
I might sign up for a basic film development class first and go from there.
I might sign up for a basic film development class first and go from there.
For most of us, it didn't take long to fall in love with darkroom printing.
Looking at the OP's example, that sort of scene doesn't really have any midtones, does it? So is there a way, in the darkroom, to remove the midtones from the equation, to end up with normal contrast in the shadows, and normal contrast within the highlights, but having those ranges closer together by having reduced contrast in the midtone range? And this even where the shadows and highlights are so intermixed that you can't selective dodge or burn either?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?