Zone system question for the roll film shooters

[naeroscatu]

Briefly: I read lots of what was written about the zone system starting with “The Negative” and I understand how this applies to LF when shooting sheet film.

I have not found any tutorial about how to apply the zone system when using roll film.

I learned from others and it proved true in my experience that overexposing bright scenes by average measuring light at half of the manufacturer ASA then developing short (less 20% or even 30%) grants very good results, rich tones good rather than harsh contrast. I also understand that this is another way of approaching the zone system, rather intuitive.
First question: this works when you use incident light metering correct?
It would be wrong to use a spot meter to put shadows on zone 3 when working under this premise, correct?

If the above is correct and it means zone contraction would the opposite be true i.e. shoot a low contrast scene at half of the manufacturer ASA and develop say 20% more? Would this grant better contrast and improved tonality?

Third question, where do you draw the line between bright scene and low contrast scene other than eyeballing; do you measure the luminance (difference between shadows and highlights) so you know what development to employ for a particular scene?

If my assumptions would be correct then I could pre-load film cassettes with 10 frames each and label them (exp ASA 64-dev -20% or exp ASA 64-dev +20%). This way I can load my camera based on a particular subject/ light and develop the film in direct relation to the subject. It would not waste much film and would give me some flexibility.

I know some will say what is the gain since even a well exposed 35mm frame cannot compare to the same in 4x5 when you enlarge and print. This is true but not every one has the equipment or skills to shoot LF, at least not now…

Can some one point me to some written material that answers my questions. thank you and apologies if this was discussed already

 

[Nick Zentena]

Third question, where do you draw the line between bright scene and low contrast scene other than eyeballing; do you measure the luminance (difference between shadows and highlights) so you know what development to employ for a particular scene?

A high contrast scene has a greater range from low to highest then your film can handle. With a spot meter this isn't hard to check. With an incident meter you'd have trouble with distant scenes.

If you're shooting the whole roll under the same light then the lack of swapable backs isn't that big of an issue.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

You have basically nailed the short comings of using the zone system on roll film. For most people it is impractical unless you have multiple film backs or cameras. Similarly, unless ALL of your frames on the roll of film are exposed for the same subject brightness range (SBR), and developed accordingly for the same Contrast Index (CI), you will get significant variations. For most people, shooting up to 36 frames on the same subject is not practical. If you are shooting some of your film at different times and on various SBR, and only have one back, the zone system is a waste IMHO. The old adage about exposing for the shadows and developing for the highlights comes into play for these scenarios. It's so easy to get wrapped around the axle with ZS otherwise. Since switching to Pyrocat, any qualms I had about the ZS are no longer a factor for me. As long as I expose for the shadows, the highlights will take care of themselves regardless of the SBR I am shooting around. Even when multiple SBR's are on one roll of film. I have never seen the need for any contractual or expansion for development with Pyrocat type staining devs. IMHO, you would be best suited getting all the detail you can on a neg, and then print using MG paper to counteract any shortcomings.

 

[Paul Howell]

[
Can some one point me to some written material that answers my questions. thank you and apologies if this was discussed already[/QUOTE]

The Zone System for 35mm Photographers written in the 80s, I dont recall the author off the top of my head, applies to MF roll film as well as 35mm.

 

[Brian Jeffery]

Give The Zone System for 35mm Photographers a go, I found it a real eye opener. It shows you a handy way to decide when to use N, N-1 and N+1, a real neat trick really works

I too thought about buying a bulk film and loading my own cassettes of say 12 exposures, but this leads to other issues. How do you store them: 12 per negative sheet, 24 per sheet or perhaps 36? How do you do your contact sheets? I don't really like too much waste, so I stick with 36 exposure rolls and just take two camera bodies; each one used for a different contrast. In practice, I've not needed a third body.

Hope this helps,

Brian

 

[david b]

The Practical Zone System by Chris Johnson is a great book.

 

[jeroldharter]

I agree that zealously practicing the zone system with 35 mm equipment is a bit of overkill. However, my prints improved drastically after I did the reading, testing, and calibrating of 35 mm film for my particular spot meter, chemistry and so on. Understanding the principles is helpful even if you cannot practice them to the letter. Also, it makes you want to take the leap to larger formats when you realize some of the limitations of roll film.

On the other hand, the zone system is much easier to utilize with 120 film. For the cost of used gear, you might pick up a used Pentax 67 with the standard 90 mm lens and have a go. With just 10 exposures on a roll of 120, it is fairly easy to shoot 1 roll per scene without exorbitant waste.

Just last night I happened on some 35 mm negatives I made on Plus-X in 1983 when I was trying to learn the zone system. I made various exposures of my gray card and did the usual testing. I could see huge improvements in my prints of that time in regard to proper contrast and tonal range after I did the calibrations so I thought the process was very helpful.

 

[Anscojohn]

Expose for the shadows, soup your 35 mm negs in D23. It makes it very hard to block up the highlights using this "semi"-compensating film developer, even when giving full development for the shadows and mid-tones.

John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

 

[naeroscatu]

Folks, many thanks for the valuable suggestions. I have now few more avenues to follow until I get my feet wet into LF. Andrew, lack of information on my part - never knew how Pyro developer works but will give it a try.
Brian, thanks for the pointer - will order the book ASAP. I really want to nail this one way or another.
Hope to show you some results soon.

 

[Christopher Walrath]

I meter from important highlights to important shadows and place them where I want them. I meter reflected light to do so. I generally decrease exposure to increase contrast as long as my subject area doesn't already fall too low into the exposure zones. I suppose you could augment development but I have never seen the need to do so.

 

[c6h6o3]

It would be wrong to use a spot meter to put shadows on zone 3 when working under this premise, correct?

Not if that's where you want them. I put my shadows on Zone IV but I'm a contact printer. If I were making negatives for enlargement, I would probably place them on Zone III. In any case you should get a good spot meter if you don't already have one. 1º.

One of Adams' intentions in developing the Zone System was to simplify the methodology. Just put your shadows where you want them and develop so that you don't blow the highlights. You'll burn a few rolls of film figuring out the development for different +/- situations, but you only have to do that once. Easy. Match the paper contrast to that of the negative when you print and you'll have gorgeous prints.