Need help using zone system with film with 19-stop dynamic range

[Craig75]

Never found any evidence of this in Kodak or Ilford published literature. Besides, where are they going? There is a hard ceiling of density, or you're saying that curves are cropped on the y-axis too?

Putting hypothetical scenarios aside, I am yet to scan a negative which saturates the width of a 14-bit ADC of a DSLR. If there were 14 stops, I'd see them on the linear profile histogram. I don't because there aren't.

this is from memory but old ilford datasheets used to show shoulder, now they just show straight part.

 

[Craig75]

True, but rarely do we have that much printing control. I do with carbon printing, but a negative with a 10-stop range is not easy to print with silver gelatin paper...a bit easier using some of that contrast control in the creation of the negative.

A 10 stop neg should fit easily on sliver gelatine paper printing at grade 00 i'd have thought (without bothering to check)

If you want it to print at a higher grade tho then its up to your darkroom skills to get those highlights on the paper

 

[Vaughn]

I disagree. Lots of control with VC paper. I don't think contrast control in the negative helps much, and can even make it worse. The problem with Zone System "controls" is that you cannot arbitrarily decide where to compress or expand contrast when developing a negative. If you apply "minus development", you lose contrast everywhere. Not usually good for printing if you value tone reproduction. All it really does is make it easier to make a straight print (ie fitting the negative to the paper). That's great if you don't care about print quality and are solely concerned with making straight prints, but otherwise not.

Cool. As long as the print looks the way one wants.

I have to admit I have not compressed the tonal range of a negative in a few decades. And in my wanders I have not come across many 10-stop SBR possibilities out in the landscape. Occasionally 7, perhaps 8. I had a 13+ one time, made a great print...just about 'normal' development.

 

[MattKing]

The reason to care about the outlying image detail is that with localized manipulations you can access that detail and make use of it.
It isn't necessarily easy to do so, and in the extreme it can make the result look unnatural but it is available.
The manufacturer's curves are most useful for labs and others making un-manipulate prints.

 

[removed account4]

Nothing to do with formats. Just the "longer scale" contact print. While it is true Azo has (had) a shorter toe and shoulder than typical enlarging papers, the density range is not longer.

Maybe.. I’m by no means an expert and while I have used azo and made my own silver chloride paper from scratch I am no expert at that either. I would have imagined if the same tonal scale could have been easily reached with conventional paper michael smith would not have fought for years for its continued production and formulated his own lodima paper….

 

[Sirius Glass]

The important thing is not how may stops a film can record, but how to get it to record the light in front of the camera in a way that the material (or method of reproduction) can reproduce those stops in a satisfactory manner. Why expose and develop for 10 stops if your process can only render 6 of them.

Because I can burn and dodge to get the rest in. Something that Ansel did too.

 

[Vaughn]

Because I can burn and dodge to get the rest in. Something that Ansel did too.

True, and compressing the highlight values in the print will differ visually from doing it all the way, or partway, in the negative. I have come to preferred the look of using the platinum process at its 'native' contrast (no contrast-increasing agents), and giving more development (usually) to the film to expand the negative's contrast to match the printing material. Carbon printing is a little more complex, but I approach it the same way.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Sirius - dodging and burning only works for general areas of the image, and cannot expand the range of the paper itself, or re-create what the film itself was incapable of capturing, or even well separate discrete values in the same area. That's why AA practiced and taught stomping on the film sandwich to get everything tight between its limited bookends - compression, compensation, minus development, whatever you want to call it. He never seems to have adopted more sophisticated techniques like masking, which enhances microtonality throughout, rather than just general areas, often even better than dedicated contact printing papers. AA had friends and neighbors who routinely did masking for sake of color prints; but he never seemed comfortable with it. He did sometimes tinker with extreme range developers. There are all kinds of tools available, including dodging/burning, which is certainly the easiest once the film itself is developed for its intended potential, and the technique I most use myself.

I sometimes encounter 12 stops of luminance range, but even that amount is tricky for TMax. 10 or 11 is safer. Just depends if I need visible texture in the extreme highlights and deepest shadows or not. Little areas of extremes which get ignored as pure black or pure white in a small print might turn out annoying in a big print, where one intuitively looks more detail. It's all a fun cat and mouse game in the darkroom, just like chasing the light itself when we trip the shutter. I find extreme lighting situations to be stimulating, but by no means a guaranteed home run. The small amount of time it takes to close and cock the shutter, insert the film holder, pull the darkslide, and trip the shutter often seem like an eternity. Did the exact lighting pattern I anticipated remain and get captured, or not; was a sheet of film wasted or not? Only after I develop it will I really know, and then the second half of the equation begins.

 

[Vaughn]

Drew -- that's why I photographed in the redwoods only on foggy windless days when I was silver printing. Larger areas would be lit up by the big softbox in the sky, and one had all the time one needed to fiddle. Shifting to processes that love contrast made me appreciate the phrase "Chasers of the Light".

A question on terminology... If I say there is a 5 stop range of light in the scene in front of me...does that mean I will be recording 6 Zones? For example...My spot meter reads from 6 to 11, which I assume would be a 5 stop range. If I expose at 9, I'll have Zones II, III, IV, V, VI and VII on the latent image, or six Zones.

So is it all correct to say, "I have 6 zones here." when there is a five stop range?

 

[DREW WILEY]

Michael - there other developers available which will straighten out that curve better, including as it dives into the toe portion. But you do indeed show its native curve with a relatively straight line section between toe and shoulder of about eleven stops, just as one should realistically expect IF one does have the confidence and metering skills to employ that total range, right down to the threshold right above the toe itself. Otherwise, the squeamish or timid who customarily rely on Zone 2 placement for deepest shadow texture, should think of it as a 9 or 10 stop film; and the inflexible Z 3 placement types, well... why bother spending your money on TMax when most cheaper films will handle an 8 stop range easily enough?

 

[DREW WILEY]

Vaughn - I tend to take only one film at a time into the redwoods. It's foggy now, and this time of year up till around August at least, the fog with its natural softbox conditions shifts about noon, and extreme lighting ranges prevail in the woods until late afternoon. I imagine the timing might be similar on the north coast. I love both effects, but want the very same film to comfortably handle both, because that's what I'm likely to encounter even on the same day. Likewise regarding certain intricate fir "tree tunnel" effects I enjoy shooting. Super-XX would of course handle that extreme range, then Bergger 200 just as well. And both T Max emulsions come close if very carefully shadow metered; but these sometimes need supplementary unsharp masking to bring out full detail. Pyro development, of course.

Other films like FP4 or HP5 - nope, no way, though I have often shot both of them in the woods for sake of somewhat softer lighting conditions only. It's hard for most photographers to realize just how extreme the lighting can often be deep under the redwoods; but that's one of the things which makes them so magical.

But I need to get off my butt and get that stack of matboard shipped off to you soon. Too many projects and now family emergencies right at tax time.

 

[Vaughn]

No lack of contrast of those foggy days! Two friends from your neck of the woods dropped by last afternoon -- they are at the Tall Trees right now...sunny morning, misty afternoon...best possible light!

The mb will always be appreciated. I have film to develop...as always!

 

[removed account4]

MAS was a classic seeing-what-you-want-to-see guy when it came to developers and materials.

I really didn't know him well enough to form an opinion of him. All I can say is that he found a paper / developer, film/developer combination with a bigly-tonal curve
and did his thing with it. i have a feeling that he tried other papers and other developers over the years and they didn't rock his boat (guessing since I didn't know him or
hear him wax poetically ( or write poetically ) on his website or in a workshop about anything but silver chloride.) maybe others are able to get modern
papers to get a bigly range like he was able to do ?
it was just a suggestion for the op to look into since its a known paper + film combination that gives that sort of range ...
and if that paper doesn't work out for him, and lodima doesn't work out, the OP can transfer his shooting and processing chops to a different paper that might.
I'd personally contact print on azo, silver chloride or salt print or similar long scale papers instead of enlarging on conventional vc or even graded papers ( do they even exist anymore?)
a negative with density is able to hold more information and with contact printing you don't really need to burn and dodge cause its in the photographic negative .
YMMV of course cause a printer I hired to do a HABS job years ago contact printed everything on regular paper with her split tone vc enlarging head and the prints were remarkable.

GOOD LUCK OP!

 

[DREW WILEY]

We have fog today, and I was prepared to go out, but it's too windy for ideal large format slow-exposures. That will change soon. The world's tallest redwoods - indeed, the tallest trees ever discovered, were just uphill from where I now live, but were entirely cut down over a hundred years ago. The very tallest was toppled by a scientist in order to count its age rings. Not even a stump remains, only a plaque in the weeds atop that ridge. I have to cross a bridge to Marin county to get to redwood forest, and although its all second growth, is still wonderful to photograph, along with moss-draped old fir trees. True old-growth ecosystems are found further north where Vaughn lives. That's in contrast to giant Sequoias, a different redwood species found only in discrete groves on the west side of the Sierras, where I grew up, which are the largest trees on earth. Then there's the little dawn redwood of China, another holdover from the Jurassic that Sauropod dinosaurs somehow didn't eat to extinction. But it did help to be taller, either way.

 

[Helge]

Hi, I am an experienced digital photog making an excursion into medium format analogue, and due to the cost of film and processing over here, am hoping to use the zone system to get myself shooting okayish photos pretty quickly and consistently.

Today I was given Kodak's 120 Tmax to try out, and when I Googled I found that the dynamic range is 19 stops!

How the heck do you use the zone system on that?

Does one:

• Continue (generally) using three stops in either direction off middle grey (and assume the rest is just latitude for when you want to push the film, which I understand to mean shooting e.g. at 800iso even though it is 100iso)

or:

• Do I need to convert the zone system for a 19 stop range, i.e. a zone now is the equivalent of just under two stops, and I now have a range of approx. 5 stops either side of middle grey?

Much appreciated!

To answer The OP, AFAICS the Zone System only really makes sense if you use spot metering (not necessarily a spot meter though) and print yourself.
Under other circumstances, it is really making mountains out of mole hills.

The camera meter or external meter, will automatically distribute the zones optimally 99% of the time, and you can always nudge it with exposure compensation if you see fit.

Tmax 400 is probably the best overall B&W film ever made, holding all features together.
Nothing has it beat for the combination of features and weighing of them.
You will not need the zone system ever, unless you push it a lot.

 

[gone]

Maybe I'm just stupid, but I can't think of any reason to shoot zone system unless you're using sheet film. B&W film has such wide exposure latitude, that after a few rolls it will be very apparent where to meter things. There's too much calculating exposures to suit me. You shouldn't have to calculate anything, it's all there in the viewfinder or on your handheld meter. If HCB had done all this figuring and math, he never would have made a single decent picture.

If the op is sending film out to be processed, then a very important step in analog film making is left out, so none of this is really in their hands, it's in the hands of a lab. Changing developers, dilutions and agitation protocols can make huge differences in how the neg will look. Exposure is important, but it's a link in a chain.

 

[Vaughn]

The Zone System was just a way of AA's to explain how it all works. One does not need the Zone System -- it is just handy knowing how it all basically works...one system or another, or no system at all.

All Hail the Holy Histogram!

 

[Bill Burk]

Here are a few full curves for TMY-2

View attachment 273804

Thanks michael_r,
Looks like 13 stops to me, at least to the shoulder.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The Zone System was just a way of AA's to explain how it all works. One does not need the Zone System -- it is just handy knowing how it all basically works...one system or another, or no system at all.

All Hail the Holy Histogram!

I only use the Zone System for exposing. I do not like the mid range compression, lack of control, … so I skip the playing with developing times unless I am getting thin negatives.

14 stops sometimes shows up but I do not strive for it.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Something is wrong there Michael. TMX100 and TMY400 are similar. ACROS simply can't be developed to the same level of gamma. Delta can be, but has more toe than either TMax film. Of course this is more about hypotheticals, because there is no reason to worry about absurdly high densities UNLESS one sacrifices the lower portion of the straight line, like paranoid Zone Zealots who routinely place shadow values on Zone 3 do. But this is why I prefer TMax to Delta. You get one more full step or "zone" of shadow resolution out of it; or one more stop of speed, if you prefer to look at it that way. To get Delta to match the curve of box TMX at box speed, I need to rate it at 50, boosting the threshold shadow values up a whole stop. Incidentally, the current TMX100 doesn't shoulder off as early as the original version of TMax.

I can't explain any of this in relation to Histograms. The vet did that to my cat, and she never had kittens again.

 

[Vaughn]

...
I can't explain any of this in relation to Histograms. The vet did that to my cat, and she never had kittens again.

A friend just took his black lab to the vet to get tutored.

 

[beemermark]

Lot's of discussion,, but does any body really think ANY film has a 19 stop range????

 

[Helge]

Lot's of discussion,, but does any body really think ANY film has a 19 stop range????

Of course it does. Measuring stops is often like measuring rubber bands.
One way to achieve more stops is pulling and sacrificing a bit of speed and contrast.
That way you can easily reach 20 stops.

But even then, at box speed 400 speeds films has a lot more than 13 stops.
Just shoot a random frame at dusk or dawn with a sun and backlit clouds and some deep shade, and you’re going to see some serious range.

 

[removed account4]

Lot's of discussion,, but does any body really think ANY film has a 19 stop range????

that's a great question beemermark.
probably there is ... but it depends on what a stop is ...
I mean there were like 10 different systems for describing Fstops back in the day
maybe whoever came up with the 19stops had a different way of measuring the grays than you know, ...
photographic mortals ... im guessing all it takes is a little imagination and someone can even find more than 2 stops in kodalith film
or tech pan shot at 200 and processed in dektol too

 

[Lachlan Young]

No, nothing is wrong. It's just how it is. They behave similarly until "extreme" highlight exposure levels where the curves are quite different. TMX and Delta 100 start to gradually roll off earlier (similar to FP4 but they are more S-shaped), whereas TMY-2 and especially Acros have much higher highlight contrast.

In the literature (and my own graphs), TMX and Delta 100 are very close. The curves are the same for all practical purposes in the various developers I've done this with. I know you have always found Delta to have less speed and/or a longer toe or something. If that is indeed what your own tests have revealed I can only guess it is because you are using a developer that doesn't agree with Delta 100 or something like that.

I

I recall that Delta 100 & TMax 100 do vary a bit more in HC-110 & Rodinal curve-wise (or at least TMax does - I recollect Delta stays much the same) - but I think a lot of the difference people think they're seeing is really due to the shadow speed difference that can exist with those two films & some developers.