Still I can't kick the idea of using spot-meter out of my mind for roll films.

CPorter said:

Are you suggesting to open up to "place" a shadow reading with a reflective meter? You don't open up to "place" a shadow reading, you stop down.....................

Click to expand...

No, we were talking about incident metering and Doremus said to stop down to place the shadows.

So I pointed out that it's not spot metering where you stop down two stops to place the Zone V on Zone III.

That's all.

But it's looking now like Doremus was right in the first place, and with a rephrased reason it makes sense!

You really do close down two stops from the incident shadow reading.

Not to shift a metered Zone V to a placed Zone III but instead the reason you do it is to drive the tones down in the shady part of the picture.

CPorter said:

huh? you are saying to open up with a refected light meter to place a shadow?

Click to expand...

As I take a break with water running down the drain (and you know that is a good thing)...

Doremus only clarified the thought process, not the direction.

In fact ... you do close down, all three of us can easily agree.

It accomplishes the same outcome.

At first I disagreed to even close down. And technically if you leave the shadow incident reading as-is it will give plenty of shadow detail.

But even Minor White closed down from palm reading in shadow (normally VI) to place palm reading in shadow on Zone IV. Palm readings are essentially incident readings. So since Minor White said it is the right thing to close down (an effectively incident shadow reading) two stops... I'll listen. I typically take what he says as a benchmark to check my thinking. If I disagree I had better have a good reason. In this case I think he is right.

And I think Doremus was right at the very first post. Close down two stops.

Oops, time for some clarification. I was certainly unclear, and maybe going the wrong direction on my mental meter it seems...

So, to summarize:

If I spot meter, I read a shadow and then place it in Zone III by stopping down two stops from the indicated reading. If I use an averaging meter to read the same shadow, e.g., by getting very close to the subject I'm metering so that other luminance values won't affect the reading, then I do the same. My spot meters, however, have Zone dials/stickers on them, so I no longer think of metering and placing my Zone III (or VI) value as "stopping down."

However, if I use an averaging reflected light meter and meter the entire scene, and then assume this average is middle gray, I use the indicated reading and hope that the average really is middle gray (whatever that means to my meter, Bill and Steve ) and that the shadows I want detail in are really two stops down from that average and fall nicely in Zone III. If I use a gray card, I do the same. This method works well in all but contrasty situations, but can give more exposure than needed in flat light, especially if expansions are being applied.

If I take an incident reading in the shadows and use the indicated settings, I'll get good shadow detail, but may have more exposure than really needed. No problem for most negative materials, but this could lead to overexposure and subsequent highlight blocking in really contrasty situations and/or more grain with small film.

If I take an incident reading in the light that is illuminating the non-shadowed areas of my scene, I'll have a great reading for slide film (as mentioned above), but will lose shadows in contrasty situations, which is not optimum for negative materials. Often this is where advice is given to open up some from the meter reading, either by an arbitrary stop or so, or by taking a shadow reading and averaging. Both of these latter likely lead to less-than-ideal exposure in more extreme situations.

What Minor White seems to be doing in your example Bill is "placing" his shadowed palm in Zone IV, which would put his sunlit palm in Zone VI if there was a two-stop difference in the illumination between lighted and shaded areas of the scene. This is pretty common and, as mentioned above, one often hears "take a reading in the light and open up two stops for subjects with lit and shaded areas when one just takes an incident reading in the light. This could be the source of my open-two-stops from the meter reading unclearness. Again, I think this works for many averagely-lit scenes, but not for extreme situations.

There, I think I've got it in a clearer form now. Sorry for the confusion.

Best,

Doremus

I'd better correct my fuzzy explanation above before I confuse anyone else (or myself) further.

My assessment of what Minor White was doing above was a bit unclear. He is obviously placing his shaded palm in Zone VI. This is, as Bill points out, similar to taking an incident reading in the shadow and closing two stops. White seems to have used this method to hold good shadow detail in the shaded areas. The rendering of subjects in the shadows are two-stops "underexposed" as compared to a "correct" exposure for subjects in that light alone, which ensures that middle gray shaded subjects end up in Zone III, i.e., as detailed blacks. A pretty safe shadow placement.

This results in a lit reading of his palm ending up in Zone VI (the "correct" Zone) only if there is only a two-stop difference between the illumination in lit and shaded areas. This is common, but in many outdoor scenes the difference in illumination between lit areas and open shade is greater than this, sometimes three or even four stops.

Variations of the "Sunny-16 Rule" recommend opening up from two to four stops for subjects in open shade (one reason I like to use a meter... there seems to be some questions about what common outdoor lighting ratios are). White's placed palm would fall in Zone VIII if the lit area were 4 stops brighter than the shaded area, or in Zone VII if the difference were three stops. This would result in overexposure of the lit subjects unless development was appropriately reduced from "Normal." I assume White took some readings of the lit area and adjusted his development accordingly as well.

In a situation where the lighting difference between shaded and lit areas is four stops (incident reading), opening two stops from the lit reading, or closing two stops from a reading taken in the light will result in the same exposure.

On a bright sunny day, with important subjects both lit and shaded, taking a reading of the lit area, or an incident reading of the light, or a palm reading in the light will usually result in underexposure, unless the shadows are pretty bright. I've heard the admonition to open up a couple of stops from such a reading in a bright contrasty situation (and reduce development accordingly), which is the source of my mistake a few posts earlier.

At any rate, I use spot-metering techniques for almost everything anymore, and haven't used an incident meter in years.

I'll quit now... I'm not helping the OP anymore.

Best,

Doremus

I own two modern digital spot meters, but I know that good photographers took wonderful pictures with very basic selenium cell meters before they were invented, novices read so much about spot meters on forums like this that many of them think that correct exposure is impossible without them, although spot meters are desirable for some types of photography they aren't absolutely necessary.

Doremus Scudder said:

My assessment of what Minor White was doing above was a bit unclear. He is obviously placing his shaded palm in Zone VI.

At any rate, I use spot-metering techniques for almost everything anymore, and haven't used an incident meter in years.

I'll quit now... I'm not helping the OP anymore.

Best,

Doremus

Click to expand...

Everything in context is correct that you said. This is a typo which should read...

My assessment of what Minor White was doing above was a bit unclear. He is obviously placing his shaded palm in Zone IV.

...

I have a hunch you are helping OP...

...

Here's a brief summary of what I based this on...

Minor White "Zone System Manual, How to Previsualize Your Pictures" outlines "Short Cut Exposure-Development Calculations"

1. Take a meter reading off the palm in shadow
2. Place on Zone IV to set exposure
3. Take a meter reading off palm in sun
4. Development determined by difference in the two readings.
5-Zone difference N-2
4-Zone difference N-1
3-Zone difference N
2-Zone difference N+1

Bill,

Thanks for catching my typo! I am (truthfully) "keyboard dyslexic," and have a tendency to transpose letters both in order and right to left (k instead of d for example).

I indeed meant Zone IV (4). I hope I haven't confused things too much with that small error. Too bad one can't go back and edit posts after a while.

I have the White, Zakia, Lorenz "Zone System Manual" also, but haven't re-read it in a while. I'd forgotten the short cut part. Makes perfect sense except it can be a bit confusing that his "3-Zone difference" is likely shaded palm in Zone IV (got it right this time!), and sunlit palm in Zone VI (IV-V-VI probably being his "three-Zone difference") which I might think of as a two-Zone difference (4+2=6). Maybe he is really developing to place his palm in Zone VII; I'll have to re-read the book when I get back to the States. As long as it's clear what Zones one is targeting, White's method should work just fine, The same would work by placing a gray card in Zone III in the shadows and measuring the difference in sunlight.

Also, the same should work with incident readings: take a reading in the shade and underexpose (got that one right this time too) two stops to place the middle gray on Zone III. Then take a reading in the light. Use the difference in the readings to determine development a là White as you quote. (Seems a bit like a rudimentary BTZS... If one added exposure compensations for the film speed change at the different developments it would be pretty close, just not continuous).

Best,

Doremus

Beyond The Zone System - Phil Davis, book has arrived today but the print quality of the photos they put in is not that good. :-(

baachitraka said:

Beyond The Zone System - Phil Davis, book has arrived today but the print quality of the photos they put in is not that good. :-(

Click to expand...

Haa forget the print quality. Look at the down jackets and glasses. Man the '70s were awful!

The information is most important in the book. The examples are illustrative but don't need to be duotone to get the messages across.

Yeah, page 140.

I will start reading it during Easter holidays...

Now I'm trying to understand the previous discussions. What exactly does it mean 'shaded palm in Zone IV'?

baachitraka said:

Thanks, I found that photo but still searching for the thread. ;-)

Click to expand...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

baachitraka said:

Now I'm trying to understand the previous discussions. What exactly does it mean 'shaded palm in Zone IV'?

Click to expand...

Correction - it's not a typo...

With a reflective meter, you can meter the light falling on a scene by holding your hand up to the light and meter your palm and "place the palm of your hand" on Zone VI, because this is correct exposure for the most pleasing pictures of people.

(Placing a meter reading on Zone VI means to open up one stop from meter reading).

Minor White described a shortcut metering technique similar to the BTZS techniques, and the shade reading is what was meant by that quote.

But contrary to normal "palm" placement, instead of opening up one stop from the shadow-based reading of your palm, you close down one stop. Believe that is because the shadow area of a photograph does not require the full exposure to be realistic.

Its funny that I have this article bookmarked for quite some time, but I only read while answering to this

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)