Zone System Sequence?

Chuck_P · Dec 30, 2007

rob champagne said:
You can calibrate to a 7 stop system, 8 stop system, 9 stop system, 10 stop system, 11 stop system or how ever many you like, but by doing so you change the relationship of how much exposure adjustment equates to a one zone change.

I suggest to the OP to not be concerned with sensitometry just yet, if you intend to learn the ZS, you will eventually grasp the basics of it. That is as far as my own understanding goes, just the basics.

Rob,
You cannot change the relationship of how much exposure adjustment equates to a one zone change. This, IMO, is sensitometrically unsound to suggest so. A one zone change, either up or down, is 0.3 log exposure units on the log exposure scale. If it is up by 0.3 log E units then the exposure is "doubled" and if it is down by 0.3 log E units then exposure is "halved". That is the same relationship found from opening "up" one stop to closing "down" one stop. So, there is a "link between camera exposure and the exposure units of sensitometry" (AA). It's the beauty of the thing.

Going from Zone V to Zone VI by opening the aperture from, say, f/11 to f/8 is a one zone change "up" just as going from Zone V to Zone IV from f/11 to f/16 is a one zone change "down"; going up is "doubling" and going down is "halving". These changes are true regardless of film testing, calibration, etc...nothing you do can change how much exposure adjustment equates to a one zone change.

Illustrated this way:
Zone : Exp Units : Log E Units
0 : 1/2
I : 1 : 0.0
II : 2 : 0.3
III : 4 : 0.6
IV : 8 : 0.9
V : 16 : 1.2
VI : 32 : 1.5
VII : 64 : 1.8
VIII : 128 : 2.1
IX : 256 : 2.4
X : 512 : 2.7

From The Negative, "the exposure units have no absolute value but to express the 1:2 relationship from one exposure zone to the next".

Just food for thought.

Chuck

RobC · Dec 30, 2007

Chuck1 said:
I suggest to the OP to not be concerned with sensitometry just yet, if you intend to learn the ZS, you will eventually grasp the basics of it. That is as far as my own understanding goes, just the basics.

Rob,
You cannot change the relationship of how much exposure adjustment equates to a one zone change. This, IMO, is sensitometrically unsound to suggest so. A one zone change, either up or down, is 0.3 log exposure units on the log exposure scale. If it is up by 0.3 log E units then the exposure is "doubled" and if it is down by 0.3 log E units then exposure is "halved". That is the same relationship found from opening "up" one stop to closing "down" one stop. So, there is a "link between camera exposure and the exposure units of sensitometry" (AA). It's the beauty of the thing.

Going from Zone V to Zone VI by opening the aperture from, say, f/11 to f/8 is a one zone change "up" just as going from Zone V to Zone IV from f/11 to f/16 is a one zone change "down"; going up is "doubling" and going down is "halving". These changes are true regardless of film testing, calibration, etc...nothing you do can change how much exposure adjustment equates to a one zone change.

Illustrated this way:
Zone : Exp Units : Log E Units
0 : 1/2
I : 1 : 0.0
II : 2 : 0.3
III : 4 : 0.6
IV : 8 : 0.9
V : 16 : 1.2
VI : 32 : 1.5
VII : 64 : 1.8
VIII : 128 : 2.1
IX : 256 : 2.4
X : 512 : 2.7

From The Negative, "the exposure units have no absolute value but to express the 1:2 relationship from one exposure zone to the next".

Just food for thought.

Chuck

I disagree.

RobC · Dec 30, 2007

jamusu said:
Rob.

Is it possible to calibrate my printing and film development with 35 mm? You have not complicated anything. In fact you have heightened my interest.

Jamusu.

Yes you can. Ansel Adams book "The Negative" details the full method. Your Carson Graves book should also tell you but I have not read it.
Also in AA's "The Negative" you will find a page on which there is a print of zones 0 thru X which illustrate how each zone should print. If you can replicate that image with your own zone negs, then that will confirm that your calibration is correct for a 10 zone system.

JBrunner · Dec 30, 2007

Chuck1 said:
Rob,
You cannot change the relationship of how much exposure adjustment equates to a one zone change. This, IMO, is sensitometrically unsound to suggest so. A one zone change, either up or down, is 0.3 log exposure units on the log exposure scale. If it is up by 0.3 log E units then the exposure is "doubled" and if it is down by 0.3 log E units then exposure is "halved". That is the same relationship found from opening "up" one stop to closing "down" one stop. So, there is a "link between camera exposure and the exposure units of sensitometry" (AA). It's the beauty of the thing.

Hi Chuck,

Expansion and contraction actually do change the zonal relationships. The jist is true when developing for N, and that is where the system starts with a zone/exposure relationship, as St Ansel asserts. Since the OP is using roll film, that will be as far as he can go, unless he is willing to shoot an entire roll for a particular development. As I said earlier, until he has a speed for his film/developer,it isn't amounting to much. Call em zones, stops, or bacon sandwiches, currently it's just expressing reciprocal relationships. You gotta start somewhere, and thats just as good a place as any, tho.

haris · Dec 30, 2007

dslater said:
...Zone 5 is a mid-tone instead of a highlight - the expansion effect is greater for higher zones than it is for lower zones. of course, testing can be used to determine development for the expansion you want.

Yes. I made also error in typing, of course zone V is midtone. What I ment was if I meter highlight of scene with spotmeter result which meter shows me will be placed in zone V, because meter place everything in zone V, meter doesn't know if I meter shadow or highlight or midtone, so whatever I meter will be placed in zone V.

So, If my spotmeter shows me 1/250 f16 for example when I aim meter to highlight, and if I expose film with those values, I would get as result midtone on area of highlight, zone V, not highlight...

Thanks for discussion.

haris · Dec 30, 2007

JBrunner said:
Hi Chuck,

...Since the OP is using roll film, that will be as far as he can go, unless he is willing to shoot an entire roll for a particular development...

And that is something people do, people mark their roll films for N, N+1, N-1 or whatever development and they change films regarding developing they will use for that film. It is not as hard as it can look. With MF cameras with interchangeable backs it is easy, just load several backs and mark them with N developing you will use, and midchange 35mm film is also not hard, especially if one use modern camera like Canon EOS500n, 3... or Nikon F90, F50... I midroll changed films in EOS 500n and EOS3 and never missed frame, never two frames overlaped or like...

jamusu · Dec 30, 2007

Rob,

My book does talk about calibration. It also explains print tone tests, as well as N development: N+1/N-1 etc.

I think the book is a great read.

Jamusu.

jamusu · Dec 30, 2007

JBrunner said:
Hi Chuck,

Expansion and contraction actually do change the zonal relationships. The jist is true when developing for N, and that is where the system starts with a zone/exposure relationship, as St Ansel asserts. Since the OP is using roll film, that will be as far as he can go, unless he is willing to shoot an entire roll for a particular development. As I said earlier, until he has a speed for his film/developer,it isn't amounting to much. Call em zones, stops, or bacon sandwiches, currently it's just expressing reciprocal relationships. You gotta start somewhere, and thats just as good a place as any, tho.

Jason,

I agree with the above post that you made 100% I know that it is not the true zone system due to the fact that I shoot 35 mm. As you stated it is just an expression of reciprical relationships, and I am happy to hear you say, "You gotta start somewhere, and thats just as good a place as any, tho", which was my main objective of starting the post. I wanted to see if I was starting off my studying and learning of the Zone System correctly. It seems as though I am. Am I?

Jamusu.

Chuck_P · Dec 30, 2007

JBrunner said:
Hi Chuck,

Expansion and contraction actually do change the zonal relationships./QUOTE]

Jason,

I don't disagree at all that expansion and contraction have their primary affect in the upper zones. I would only suggest that the only relationships that are changing is the negative density compared to its brightness value as it was measure in the subject. Perhaps that's a frog hair I'm splitting , but I feel it has relavance. Zonal relationships don't change, IMO they're constant, what changes is where the desired negative density in the upper zones is developed as opposed to where it "fell" on the scale when it was measured. Understand, I don't mean to be argumentative----just talking.

As you know, a N-1 contraction develops a Zone IX reflectance value to a Zone VIII negative density, a full shift down by 0.3 log E units. And I agree that it does not equate to a full one zone shift down for the middle zones and essentially no effect on the lower zones at all, otherwise we would not be doing much expansion of negative contrast (to state the obvious as I'm just completing the point).

Some of that stuff Rob is saying about a 7,8,9,10, 11, etc...system is just plain not clear to me. But he can clarify that as he wishes, he disagrees with me but offers no supporting statements.

Thanks
Chuck

JBrunner · Dec 30, 2007

Well, I've been thinking about it, and here it is... Trying to explain the Zone System, in all its possible permutations, applications, interpretations, iterations, and evolutions, in the absence of practical experience is daunting, to say the least. I would just say to Jamusu that he is asking questions along the right lines, and that if he keeps reading and shooting, that he will eventually master the Zone system, or whatever his version of sensitometry evolves to.

In regard to a basic budget spot meter, I would recommend a Soligir, or one of its iterations, if you can find one. They were sold as Soligor, and Tundra, and a couple of others. If you wanted to go a bit more, get an old Pentax. JMO. Search the archives for the arguments

JBrunner · Dec 30, 2007

JBrunner said:
Well, I've been thinking about it, and here it is... Trying to explain the Zone System, in all its possible permutations, applications, interpretations, iterations, and evolutions, in the absence of practical experience is daunting, to say the least. I would just say to Jamusu that he is asking questions along the right lines, and that if he keeps reading and shooting, that he will eventually master the Zone system, or whatever his version of sensitometry evolves to.

In regard to a basic budget spot meter, I would recommend a Soligir, or one of its iterations, if you can find one. They were sold as Soligor, and Tundra, and a couple of others. If you wanted to go a bit more, get an old Pentax. JMO. Search the archives for the arguments

I think what Rob is saying is that if your particular process is in the end, only capable of delivering say seven stops, and you have settled on ten zones for your "zone system" then each of your "zones" will be less than one stop, rather than giving the zone the absolute value of a stop.

Chuck_P · Dec 30, 2007

Jason,

Well said.

It's easy to get caught up in it all I guess.

RobC · Dec 30, 2007

JBrunner said:
You gotta start somewhere, and thats just as good a place as any, tho.

Is it?
Paper can show an approx 7 stop range of reflectance. It might be considered a very logical thing to make the default for film development to capture 7 stops of subject brightness range so that you get to duplicate the subject contrast in the print.

Funny that because that is more or less what the film manufacturers do with their ISO and dev times. Funny thing is also that the average photo is also of an approx 7 stop subject brightness range according to much research done long ago. So how is it that AA arrived at 10 stops? Well I think he found it a bit difficult explaining 7 or 8 or 9 stop ranges to his students so he expanded it to 10 stops for no other reason than it is easier to each 1 zone equals one stop.

Also have you ever tried making zone negatives where the zone VIII neg is 1.3logD and then printing each zone using the same time. Which one came out paper base white? Zone VIII by any chance?

The zone system is full of annomalies and the logical starting place is a 7 stop subject range and not 10 as in the zone system.

But if I said that I would be a heretic and would be burnt at the stake for being an evil wizard of the black arts.

jamusu · Dec 30, 2007

Correct you are again Jason.

I just want to know the basics for now so that I can get the correct feel. With that said, if you all want to lay on the heavy info I will humbly accept. Maybe it will help me in my quest to ZONE OUT a little quicker!

Thanx everyone.

Jamusu.

RobC · Dec 31, 2007

I merely add these things so that you understand from the start that you can bend the zone system to suit your own needs or vision. There are a lot of people out there who will quote log densities and quote fixed values and dogma. Those are the ones who have not understood it fully and how flexible it is. I think it was John Sexton who said: "It's a zone system and not a pinpoint system."
Ultimately you usually only make one exposure. If its out by half a stop or even a full stop, it's not the end of the world. But that doesn't mean you can afford to be sloppy with your technique.

Chuck_P · Dec 31, 2007

jamusu said:
I just want to know the basics for now so that I can get the correct feel. With that said, if you all want to lay on the heavy info I will humbly accept. Maybe it will help me in my quest to ZONE OUT a little quicker!

Jamusu,

Truth be told, IMO, you will not learn the ZS here at APUG. Folks can make affirmations along the way for you while, hopefully, trying not to muddy the concept, but the revelations that are the learning part of it are a most personal experience. IMO, your best advice will be that which does not attempt to pass on many personal twists in its application because you may get so many that it confuses the hell out of you; to me, that's like adding a 1000 peices to a puzzle that contains just a small fraction of that, JMO. Best to just pick your resources and dive in.

Good Luck!

Chuck

jamusu · Dec 31, 2007

I agree with you Chuck.

I just love the information that everyone is giving me. I consider myself a student of photography first. I will only use the basics and as I get better will try to better utilize the more technical side.

Jamusu.

Christopher Walrath · Jan 1, 2008

Jamusu, just go to your local book seller (Barnes and Noble, Borders, etc. if available) and pick up a copy of Ansel Adams 'The Negative'. It will be about 7-8 inches tall, about 5/8 inch thick, palish blue in color and have a number '2' on the side. What better way to learn the ZS than from the man who helped to actually put it into terms in the first place. Use it in conjunction with the superb info in this thread. And use it to form more questions to bring back to us so we can assist if you need.

Zone System Sequence?

Chuck_P

RobC

RobC

JBrunner

Moderator

haris

haris

jamusu

jamusu

Chuck_P

JBrunner

Moderator

JBrunner

Moderator

Chuck_P

RobC

jamusu

RobC

Chuck_P

jamusu

Christopher Walrath

Zone System Sequence?

Moderator

haris

haris

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency