So I have a question for the meter for the shadows gurus.

[markbarendt]

Correct me if I'm wrong there are two basic pieces of info that need to be found. (Assuming all the testing and practice needed has been done to get a reliable personal EI.)

1 Camera setting
2 Scene brightness range

Together these two nuggets of info provide everything needed from the scene to "Expose for the shadows and develope for the highlights."

Basically the shadow and highlight measurements need to be taken then you use an offset to get the camera setting and find the difference between them to adjust development.

So why is it that ya'll don't just figure your offset into your EI and read the camera setting directly from the shadow meter reading?

Seems to me that would be simpler, faster, and less prone to error.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Correct me if I'm wrong there are two basic pieces of info that need to be found. (Assuming all the testing and practice needed has been done to get a reliable personal EI.)

1 Camera setting
2 Scene brightness range

Together these two nuggets of info provide everything needed from the scene to "Expose for the shadows and develope for the highlights."

Basically the shadow and highlight measurements need to be taken then you use an offset to get the camera setting and find the difference between them to adjust development.

So why is it that ya'll don't just figure your offset into your EI and read the camera setting directly from the shadow meter reading?

Seems to me that would be simpler, faster, and less prone to error.

Because the shadow reading tells you nothing about the range of the scene. For instance, I use Tri-X almost exclusively for 8x10. I rate it at 200, check that the scene isn't too contrasty, and usually use an incident reading. If the important details don't go over about 8 stops I get, with my development and agitation, easy to print negatives with great detail everywhere I want it.

 

[markbarendt]

I'm not suggesting "just one reading", I see the point of measuring high and low to find the range.

My question could be rephrased "why doesn't the EI number include the offset to find the camera setting directly?"

The range calculation doesn't care, right?

 

[ic-racer]

In the field the most important thing is exposure to render the shadow detail you desire. Estimating the brightness range that falls on the negative, by pointing a meter at the scene, is not so easy. However, it is less important if one uses some form of contrast manipulation during the printing process. For example, paper of different grades allows one to print negatives from an extreme range of scenes one might encounter in nature.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'offset.' Since the lowest area of intended negative density is sometimes difficult to find and meter in the scene, one can use some higher values and use an 'offset' to find the correct exposure. For example the process metering an area as zone III and 'placing' it on Zone III in leu of finding and measuring a Zone I area, demonstrates this principle.

 

[Xmas]

It is ok to offset the ISO eg for zone1 if you only use zone1.

 

[markbarendt]

Mark, by "offset", I assume (perhaps incorrectly) you're referring to the typical zoner methods of determining exposure for a scene - ie meter the shadows and stop down say two stops. If so, I guess you're asking why not just factor that into your EI so that when you read the shadows the indicated exposure places them on "Zone III"? In other words, say you standardize on placing your shadows on "Zone III", add two stops to your EI, set the meter to that EI and read your shadows?

You can certainly do that, but unless you are always going to place the shadows on that point, you'll still end up with the same adjustments to make whenever you depart from whatever you standardize on (decide to place shadows higher, lower or whatever). In the end it is all rather arbitrary.

You assume correctly.

It is my impression that when zoning the norm is to place the shadows point the same way each time.

 

[markbarendt]

I'm not sure what you mean by 'offset.' Since the lowest area of intended negative density is sometimes difficult to find and meter in the scene,

The "offset" I'm talking about is the difference between the camera setting and the normal place you meter.

I agree that it may be tough to find the exact shadow point in certain shots; that's not the norm though. The norm is that you can find it.

Why not use an EI that actually reflects "your" personal norm so that "you" get a direct meter reading? From there it would be easy to say "I" need to go a little over or a little under.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Mark, by "offset", I assume (perhaps incorrectly) you're referring to the typical zoner methods of determining exposure for a scene - ie meter the shadows and stop down say two stops. If so, I guess you're asking why not just factor that into your EI so that when you read the shadows the indicated exposure places them on "Zone III"? In other words, say you standardize on placing your shadows on "Zone III", add two stops to your EI, set the meter to that EI and read your shadows?

You can certainly do that, but unless you are always going to place the shadows on that point, you'll still end up with the same adjustments to make whenever you depart from whatever you standardize on (decide to place shadows higher, lower or whatever). In the end it is all rather arbitrary.

Right... Your meter will try to make whatever detail is in the shadow middle gray (Zone V). If all one ever did is underexpose two f-stops (expose at Zone III) then the OP's proposed method would work. However, the metered shadow detail doesn't always belong on Zone III. It might need to be placed on Zone IV or II or I or I+, etc. If one is extremely careful with his/her metering technique then the OP's proposed method does not work.

This doesn't even address minor exposure correction for adjusted development to control overall contrast.

 

[Xmas]

with roll film or 35mm if I have time I meter for zone1 in a shadow I want detail.

This is all you can do?

 

[ic-racer]

The "offset" I'm talking about is the difference between the camera setting and the normal place you meter.

I agree that it may be tough to find the exact shadow point in certain shots; that's not the norm though. The norm is that you can find it.

Why not use an EI that actually reflects "your" personal norm so that "you" get a direct meter reading? From there it would be easy to say "I" need to go a little over or a little under.

I think I understand you. So if you always meter a Zone V portion of your scene your "offset" is zero. If you always are going to meter the Zone III value in your scene, with your camera's built-in spot meter, you set your camera's meter ISO/ASA to two stops higher, etc. Nothing wrong with that and it might be the most useful way to use the built-in spot meters featured on some cameras. Just don't forget to re-set the ISO/ASA if you need to do an average meter reading of if there is no Zone III value in your scene, etc.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

It's much easier for me to set my meter at the correct ISO setting to place reflected Zone V exposure where it belongs, for my film development procedures, and adjust as needed to place shadows where they belong. Other methods seem unnecessarily confusing. The Zone System is the most logical and works best for me. I'll never understand all these work-around methods because they're completely illogical to me and are not nearly as accurate. What's so difficult to understand about the Zone System?

 

[andrew.roos]

You could do that - adjust the film Exposure Index (ISO) to place the shadows in a specific zone - e.g. set the EI two stops faster than the correct value for the film being used to place shadows in Zone III.

However, I place my shadows in different zones depending on a number of factors - how I visualize the print, but also how contrasty the scene is - for a low-contrast scene I might place the shadows in Zone IV (1 stop down from middle grey) to ensure I get plenty of shadow detail (since there is no danger of losing contrast in the highlights as the scene is low contrast); while for a high-contrast scene where the shadows are not critical to the print, I might place them in Zone II (3 stops down from middle grey). Also, since I don't use zone system exclusively - I also quite often use incident metering - I would be in danger of inadvertently underexposing an incident metered shot if I had set my EI say two stops higher than the film rating as you suggest.

I guess the question is moot for me as I use the Gossen Luna-Pro SBC meter with spot attachment. It displays the light reading in stops relative to the currently set exposure which is most useful for ZS work. If I want a shadow in Zone III then I simply meter it, and adjust the light meter dial until the display reads -2 (2 stops down from Zone V). Then I can meter the highlights and see where they fall. If the scene is too contrasty I might for example readjust the meter so that the shadow now reads -3 (Zone II). When satisfied, I simply choose my aperture and transfer the corresponding shutter speed from the meter to the camera, without having to change the camera EI. It's really very intuitive!

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I don't even use the Luna Pro dial (or other meter adjustment). I'm not stating that others shouldn't. It's easier/faster (for me) to adjust after reading the meter. For instance, if the meter reads f/5.6 for a shadow that I know belongs at Zone III then I know exposure should be as if it read f/11 so that's where I place exposure (for "N" development). Then I read the area which should belong at Zone VIII (for example). If that reading tells me f/32 then, assuming no adjustment to development is needed which will affect E.I., then I know I'm GTO. What's so complicated about that?

 

[gone]

To keep it simple, I simply use Tri-X and expose for the value that is of interest to me. You have so much latitude, all will go fine w/o fancy calculations and such. Works really well. If you used just the shadows for metering, well, the highlights.....

 

[markbarendt]

However, I place my shadows in different zones depending on a number of factors

My thought is that if one shoots to the shadows as their norm, then by building that norm into one's EI it eliminates the math for most shots, just read the meter and shoot.

We already describe development as "N", "N+x", "N-x", it would be no stretch to describe exposure the same way to address the situations you describe.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

My thought is that if one shoots to the shadows as their norm, then by building that norm into one's EI it eliminates the math for most shots, just read the meter and shoot.

We already describe development as "N", "N+x", "N-x", it would be no stretch to describe exposure the same way to address the situations you describe.

How is it easier to have five or more exposure indices for a given film than to just use the Zone System as intended? You're still making an exposure adjustment anyway.

 

[markbarendt]

It doesn't matter. It's just a reference point.

I agree. If someone chose to use highlights or zone VI as their normal reference, no problem, just use the right personal EI. The only time you'd have to think much about it would be when you chose what film to load.

It just seems to me that constantly counting stops and doing the math is a pain, a direct reading is easier and theoretically would be less error prone.

 

[markbarendt]

How is it easier to have five or more exposure indices for a given film than to just use the Zone System as intended? You're still making an exposure adjustment anyway.

If my metering norm was to place "shadows with detail" at a given density point on the negative every time I would only need 1 EI. The only times "E+" or "E-" would be applied would be for special situations, like Andrew described.

They could be applied on the fly, "oh I need a little extra on this shot"; from the direct reading you could then just "open up one." It's one step for the math instead of two.

 

[cliveh]

Correct me if I'm wrong there are two basic pieces of info that need to be found. (Assuming all the testing and practice needed has been done to get a reliable personal EI.)

1 Camera setting
2 Scene brightness range

What about the photographers interpretation of the scene?

 

[markbarendt]

cliveh, Mark is talking about the info you "gather" using a spot meter. The photographer's interpretation and aesthetic choices are more about how you use the information you gather to make decisions.

Yep

 

[baachitraka]

I set the E.I and read the shadows directly when using incident meter and that include corrections for filters.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Mark,

What you are talking about is exactly what we Zonies who use meters with Zone Dials do. The beauty of a Zone Dial is that you can decide exactly where a particular shadow value can go. I may want an open shadow in Zone IV; so I take a meter reading and set the EV number opposite the Zone IV chip on the Zone Dial. No subtracting stops in my head.

For the next shot, I might want a dark shadow in Zone II, so I take a meter reading and place the EV number opposite the Zone II chip on the Zone dial.

For the next, I like Zone III for the shadow, so.... You get the idea.

After having placed the shadow, I measure the brightness of the important highlights and see where they fall. I choose a development scheme to match, and adjust exposure according to the development scheme if necessary. I then shoot.

(Note that my interpretation of the scene is included in my decision where to place the shadow and how to develop to get the highlights I want. It is not a "mechanical" rendering, but a creative process making these decisions.)

The problem with your method, as I see it, is that if you adjust your EI on the meter, you are stuck with one shadow placement, e.g., Zone III or the like. If you want to place a shadow differently, then you need to change the EI on your meter... troublesome and easy to forget...

Get a Zone Dial for your meter, you'll be happy you did. Ralph Lambrecht has some on his website for free download.

Best,

Doremus

 

[markbarendt]

Thanks Doremus,

I'm familiar with zone dials and they are a truly elegant solution for certain meters. It essentially allows the direct readout. The dial is not a universally elegant solution though. For those of us with digital readout meters or those using in camera metering, the zone dial is an extra mini-slide-rule that we would need to carry, find, and set before each shot.

I do also see the artistic value of "picking your peg points"; that is important, no doubt. My assumption though is that, regardless of the point in the scene you choose to meter, you are normally trying to place a certain zones, say III, in a very consistent place in relation to the toe of a given film.

Yes, surely with my way, I do need to ask myself "is the metered point lighter or darker than my normal peg?" and from there I need to offset the camera setting a bit. Normally it's just by one click one way or the other as I set the camera.

There is my personal automated case. When I spot meter faces (which is my normal spot meter peg) with my Nikons in "A" mode my EI needs to include that choice.