Photographing a black horse in a dark barn

[Romanko]

Ralph Lambrecht and Chris Woodhouse in their wondeful book "Way beyound monochrome" provide an example of using the Zone System when phographing a white horse in front of a bright barn and a black horse in a dark barn. An automatic light meter would measure both scenes as medium grey resulting in similar rendering. The authors recommend increasing the exposure by two stops in the first case and reducing it by the same amount for the low-key dark horse scene. The second advice appears to contradict with the "expose for shadows" rule. If we were to follow it we would use the automatic meter reading or even overexpose the dark scene to get maximum shadow details with the intent to get the right tonality when printing the negative or post-processing the digital image. How do you measure low-key low-contrast scenes? Do you use different methods when shooting film and digital?

 

[mshchem]

Incident light meter

 

[Romanko]

Incident light meter

Incident light meter in this example gives an exposure two stops below that of the reflective light meter, as recommended. That solves the practical problem of metering the scene but does not resolve the seeming contradiction with the "expose for shadows" rule.

 

[MattKing]

The authors recommend increasing the exposure by two stops in the first case and reducing it by the same amount for the low-key dark horse scene. The second advice appears to contradict with the "expose for shadows" rule.

Actually, it follows the "expose for the shadows rule".
The reason for that being the black horse in a dark barn is all shadows. And for that reason, your meter reading is entirely a shadow reading. The decision to reduce the exposure by two stops is a decision to "place" the shadows where you intend them to be.
Not a black horse, but a dark photographer:

 

[Romanko]

Actually, it follows the "expose for the shadows rule".

Thank you Matt. That explains it. I shoot both digital and film often simultaneously so my instinct was to "expose to the right" in both media.

Very nice image! The dynamic range of this scene must have been huge! Is this a scan of a print? Is it toned?

 

[MattKing]

Thank you Matt. That explains it. I shoot both digital and film often simultaneously so my instinct was to "expose to the right" in both media.

Very nice image! The dynamic range of this scene must have been huge! Is this a scan of a print? Is it toned?

Thanks,
That started out as a B&W negative.
I then scanned that negative, and had an 11"x15" print made on colour RA4 paper from that black and white scan - that allowed me to choose a "chocolate" tone.
I then scanned that print - actually that is a stitched image from two scans.
Then I had to downsize it greatly to show it here.
And yes, the dynamic range was huge. The "blur" is actually subject motion - she is a very energetic photographer!
Fun story: The subject of the photo happens to be a CAPA accredited photography judge, and I knew she was scheduled to come and both make a presentation to the photography club I was then a member of, followed by a critique session for member prints submitted for that purpose. So I made the print for her to critique without warning her ahead of time. When it appeared on the judging stand, she had never seen the photo before, but quickly realized she was critiquing a photo of herself - and she laughed!

 

[Dustin McAmera]

"place" the shadows where you intend them to be

'Will someone move this horse into Zone Two so I can photograph it?'

 

[Sirius Glass]

Incident light meter

Or a spot meter using the Zone System putting the horse in Zone 2 or Zone 3.

 

[mshchem]

Yep

 

[grain elevator]

I haven't photographed something that overall dark, but if it's just all dark I'd certainly expose generously, one can still print down, there's no point in making a super thin negative on purpose, that will be hard to print. A good low key image IMHO is all about the few select highlights though. So I'd try to have interesting lighting and make sure the highlights remain printable.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

A light meter mindlessly tries to turn everything (single objects filling the frame or averaging larger complex scenes) to about middle gray. I prefer a spot meter.

My thought flow goes, "The meter says f22 @ 1/15th second, but I want the _____ to be darker" then change settings to get what I want. It's what photographers were doing long before the Zone System was born.

Recommend The New Zone System Manual by White, Zakia, & Lorenz. It opened my eyes to how fluid the Zone System can be...many have been trapped in rigid ruts & rules ways of thinking and this book will help alleviate that.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Here’s an example of the kind of rut I’m talking about.

Some people will say, “I have adjusted my time exposure for reciprocity law failure, therefore I must reduce development time”

Here’s what Ilford says about that:

“You may also find that the contrast is increased with long exposures. This is because of the light level difference in light levels between highlights and shadows in the image in effect giving different reciprocity failure within the image. If this occurs, then pulling the development may be required (reducing development time) but will depend on the range of light levels in the image.”

To their credit, they hint at the end that this reduced development is not a hard rule.

I’ve found, with adjusted exposures of over 2 minutes in deep rain forest, that giving normal development effectively gives a +1 development to the higher middle values and increases local contrast in those areas. It works, because there are no high values to blow out.

I call it reciprocity law bonus, not failure.

 

[Vaughn]

I haven't photographed something that overall dark, but if it's just all dark I'd certainly expose generously, one can still print down, there's no point in making a super thin negative on purpose, that will be hard to print. A good low key image IMHO is all about the few select highlights though. So I'd try to have interesting lighting and make sure the highlights remain printable.

Good advice

In the OP, "a dark barn" is pretty vague. Matt's is using backlighting in a 'dark barn'. Without a reference to contrast (SBR) of either senerio, exposure advice would be chancy. A photo taken in the other direction might yield a very short SBR and require a different exposure and development approach.

(Matt's approach was fun)

Another approach in the lesson would be to have a white, a black, and a gray horse standing together in front of the barn...and play with that.

reciprocity law bonus

I like that. It is a failure of the reciprocity law, but a bonus to us who can use that extra bit of contrast in a scene. I often go light on the adjustment to exposure -- let those small little dark areas in the scene that will be too small to see detail in the print anyway, drop down to Zone 0...then give it extra development to really pump the contrast up!

 

[Maris]

I'd give this subject normal exposure (straight off the meter) in order to put the black horse and dark barn on the straight-line part of the film's characteristic curve. That's where the best tonal separation happens.
Then I would PRINT the negative down to the desired level of darkness to reinforce the black horse/ dark barn impression. A fully exposed negative does not dictate tonal terms to the enlarging paper; rather the other way around.

 

[laser]

The traditional subject is a "black cat in a coal bin at midnight".

 

[Chuck1]

Maybe try some fill flash

 

[MattKing]

Maybe try some fill flash

Generally speaking, a good idea.
But horses and flashes don't always get along well together.......

 

[Chuck1]

I was referring to the black cat in the coal bin, it wouldn't be direct or full strength

 

[Romanko]

Thank you all for your replies. Just to clarify, I have no need or intention of photographing horses in barns. I was referring to the example in the book.

I'd give this subject normal exposure

I would do the same. If the scene is of small dynamic range I might even overexpose a stop or two to use all available dynamic range of the media. The Zone System apparently suggests that the negative should render the tones closer to what they seem to the eye.

I call it reciprocity law bonus, not failure.

I have no experience of shooting film in low-light conditions. As I understand it, with reciprocity failure you are dealing with a different (and mostly unknown) film stock as the characteristic curves of the film are no longer valid. It should be possible to correct the curves for the Schwarzschild effect without going into the trouble of actual testing. You will be getting different curves for different exposures until you get to the point where your highlight exposures are longer than a few seconds.

Back to my question. I would still like to understand the pros and cons of "underexposing" the low-key low-contrast scenes as the Zone System seems to suggest. Why not use the whole available dynamic range? After all, the negative is "a score", right? What if some time later you decide to make a high-key print from your dark-horse image? I know this goes against "previsualization" but honestly who cares? It is the image that matters.

 

[Vaughn]

That is why I would like to know how much darker the 'dark' barn interior is compared the the black horse. Yes, meter the black horse and if the surroundings are two or four stops brighter than the horse, take two stops off the horse reading (going from the meter wanting to make it a grey horse, to a black one). The horse will be a nice detailed black on the negative, and one can give extra development to boost the surroundings if needed. Give the horse a good brushing first...one might be a little surprised well the hair picks up highlights.

If there are significant areas surrounding the horse that have less light reflecting from them than the horse, I would consider increasing my exposure to get detail or texture in those black areas on the negative, then I would have more options when printing...burning down the horse and keeping some texture and detail in the surroundings.

PS -- adjustments for adjusting for RF have been pretty well mapped out for all film/developers combos. I commonly have exposures in the 10 second to 10 minute range (sheet film, B&W)

PS#2 -- If your barn is as dark as a black horse, turn a bloody light on! No working barn should be that dark --just not safe. Definitely should not be photographing in there with animals walking around!

 

[Romanko]

Thank you, Vaughn. One thing that I love about this forum is that you always learn a lot of new stuff. I am a suburban dweller and while people keep horses on nearby farms I do not normally come anywhere close to them. Now I am fully equipped with knowledge required to expertly handle the task of photographing these beautiful animals both outdoors and in barns of various designs.

Yes, meter the black horse

This would be my approach. Meter for the main subject. I shot film as a kid and after a long break from photography had to relearn it with a digital camera. I do not use the Zone System but I know a lot of photographers who do and achieve wondeful results. For me the histogram on the screen of my digital camera is sufficient to determine the exposure for a film shot. I shoot medium format and bracket exposures in difficult light situations. I recently started shooting slides and while my first six rolls of Ektachrome came out reasonably well I feel that I could do a better job with metering. Hence my interest in the Zone System.

 

[Vaughn]

I packed mules for a decade, doing trail work in a wildernes here in California...and learned to milk cows in New South Wales. My point being that most likely Ralph Lambrecht and Chris Woodhouse's 'dark barn' still had plenty of light in it. One that has a lower light level than outside, true, but perhaps a nice range of contrast. But I would need to read the original passage to be sure.

I have not had a lot of experience with slides. Some early 120 film, and some 64T in 35mm and 4x5 for copy work a long time ago. A different approach than with B&W negative film. Enjoy!

 

[snusmumriken]

Isn't there an issue for reflective metering, that healthy horses are shiny? - ie the coat produces spectral reflections depending on its orientation to the light. You won't want those areas to be rendered black. So I'd be inclined to meter other non-horse shadow areas, or skin tone (hand), or use incident metering.

 

[grain elevator]

I recently started shooting slides and while my first six rolls of Ektachrome came out reasonably well I feel that I could do a better job with metering. Hence my interest in the Zone System.

Wait. We're talking about slide film?! Then scratch my advice above. Expose more or less as you would digital w/o possibility of post-processing; the main concern is not blowing out highlights you want.

 

[Hassasin]

Shooting negative film: the key to solution is always the tonal range of a scene before anything else is considered, ZS or not. Play with what scene gives in relation to what film and developer does. Low tonal range is typically bullet proof for "proper" exposure, lots of room to play with later.

But none of this is applicable to shooting reversal where what's done is done.