Zone System - who has an easy to follow - simple guideline to setting it up

[250swb]

-- OR decided to try something else. There are no shortage of shutterbugs doing that.

P.S. A densitometer is not essential. If you have an enlarger "analyzer" or meter, or a hand-held meter with an enlarger attachment, you are all set. If all else fails, your eyeball does a pretty good job.

I was replying to the OP thinking that is what he wanted to do, not saying he shouldn't do it as you suggest.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I second what Nicholas has advised.

The ZS assumes you'll be basing exposure on a shadow value and then seeing where the other values "fall." Read/learn about Zones II through V so you can place a given shadow value in the approximate Zone you want it. Inky black, Zone I or II, black with texture, but still very dark, Zone III, luminous shadows in landscapes, Zone IV, Shadows on snow or white sand, Zone V, etc. And, you'll need to be able to easily and accurately meter shadows for exposure determination and the other values to see where they fall. If you don't have a spot meter, maybe the ZS is not for you.

Don't bother with film-speed testing; simply rate your film 2/3-stop slower than box speed. This compensates for the Zone VI metering technique and assumed speed point. It will be way close enough to get started with and most likely not have to be changed.

Find yourself a N (normal) developing time by photographing a scene with a full distribution of values from Zone III through Zone VIII (textured black through textured white). Make a few negatives of the scene, develop one at the manufacturer's recommended time in whatever developer you choose and make your best print on the paper you use at an intermediate contrast setting (your N). I, like Nicholas, recommend you use grade/filtration 2.5 or 3 (I like 3) for your "normal" grade. Make a straight print with the Zone VIII textured whites in the right place. If the shadows are too dark, develop the next negative 15% less than the first and try again. If the shadows aren't dark enough, develop 15% more and try again. Within about three prints, you'll have a good N developing time. (Remember, you just need to be close, i.e., within half a grade or so, so don't obsess with getting a perfect print from a straight print at a selected grade - you just need to be inside the goalposts, not exactly in the middle).

Now you have your N development time and a usable E.I. Go out and make photographs, keeping good notes. The real learning curve of the Zone System is learning how to visualize what you're going to get in the final print from the meter readings you take in the field, so keep track of those. Imagine how you want the shadows, mid-tones and highlights to be rendered according to the meter readings and see if they match what actually happens when you make a print. You'll have to adjust your visualization to agree with the realities of the medium; that's the real learning curve.

With experience, you'll know what your going to get before you release the shutter, where printing problems will be, what you need to dodge and burn, etc. And, if you find your shadows are not exposed enough for your taste, you can adjust E.I. or change development times if your negative contrast isn't getting you in the ballpark most of the time. Field notes help here.

As far as contractions and expansions are concerned (N- and N+ development times): Most contrast control can be done with VC papers these days, but there are still times you need to contract or expand development. However, you don't need to aim exactly for a particular paper grade/contrast filtration (as was necessary with graded papers in the past). So, just think that N-1 is about 20% less development than N and N+1 is about 20% more (again, you can adjust these later if needed).

Scenes that in the classic ZS would require N-1 or N+1 development can be dealt with easily by developing at N and using a different contrast filtration to make up the difference. When you run into a scene that the classic ZS would call N-2 or N-3, just develop N-1 and deal with the rest of the contrast control with your VC paper range (e.g., N-1 development with a #1 filter when your N is a #3 filter = N-3). The same with expansions; for N+2 and N+3 situations, just develop N+1 and use higher-contrast filtration to make up the difference.

That will get you more than started. Remember, if you don't use the visualization aspect of the ZS, you aren't really using the ZS, just ensuring adequate exposure and a negative with a usable contrast range. Being able to see in your mind's eye what you're results will be before making the exposure is the real advantage.

Best,

Doremus

I have found that for me using only the exposure part of the Zone System, great success with color print and black & white film. I look at the composition, choose what I want Zone V to be and which Zone II, III or IV for when I want the shadow exposure based on the film box speed. Then is needed adjust for any filter. While I understand and can use the Zone System development adjustment, I have not needed to use them. YMMV

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Using exposure/development control when making negatives means less reliance on heroic efforts during printing.

In effect, it puts you closer to the middle of the playing field where adjustments are easier, rather than out near the fringe where tiny modifications can get wildly twitchy.

 

[Kino]

I just spent the last hour exposing 4 sheets of Delta 100 with a Kodak Step wedge taped to the emulsion to start my calibration.

Since I only have one wedge target, I had to tape it to the surface of the first sheet, run outside and shoot a defocused white card at +5 stops (after confirming with a spot meter) and then run inside back to the darkroom, douse the lights, move the target and do it again three more times.

Tonight I will mix a fresh liter of D76 from scratch and let it age overnight for testing tomorrow.

Plan on starting at Ilford recommended time/temp for the first sheet and then decrease development time for the next two sheets by 1 minute each.

Once I read these tests on my densitometer and plot the curves for these three sheets, I can evaluate where it is going and decide if I need to continue decreasing development times or bounce back to the top and add a minute to see the effect (I suspect the former, not the later).

Was it a pain, oh yes. My neighbors think I am crazy anyway, this has cemented their opinion. Who runs in and out of their house, taking pictures of a white board?

No matter how you decide to calibrate your development times, it takes pain-in-the-butt testing and burning film.

 

[xkaes]

Proving there are many ways to do it -- but it only has to be done once.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I second what Nicholas has advised.

The ZS assumes you'll be basing exposure on a shadow value and then seeing where the other values "fall." Read/learn about Zones II through V so you can place a given shadow value in the approximate Zone you want it. Inky black, Zone I or II, black with texture, but still very dark, Zone III, luminous shadows in landscapes, Zone IV, Shadows on snow or white sand, Zone V, etc. And, you'll need to be able to easily and accurately meter shadows for exposure determination and the other values to see where they fall. If you don't have a spot meter, maybe the ZS is not for you.

Don't bother with film-speed testing; simply rate your film 2/3-stop slower than box speed. This compensates for the Zone VI metering technique and assumed speed point. It will be way close enough to get started with and most likely not have to be changed.

Find yourself a N (normal) developing time by photographing a scene with a full distribution of values from Zone III through Zone VIII (textured black through textured white). Make a few negatives of the scene, develop one at the manufacturer's recommended time in whatever developer you choose and make your best print on the paper you use at an intermediate contrast setting (your N). I, like Nicholas, recommend you use grade/filtration 2.5 or 3 (I like 3) for your "normal" grade. Make a straight print with the Zone VIII textured whites in the right place. If the shadows are too dark, develop the next negative 15% less than the first and try again. If the shadows aren't dark enough, develop 15% more and try again. Within about three prints, you'll have a good N developing time. (Remember, you just need to be close, i.e., within half a grade or so, so don't obsess with getting a perfect print from a straight print at a selected grade - you just need to be inside the goalposts, not exactly in the middle).

Now you have your N development time and a usable E.I. Go out and make photographs, keeping good notes. The real learning curve of the Zone System is learning how to visualize what you're going to get in the final print from the meter readings you take in the field, so keep track of those. Imagine how you want the shadows, mid-tones and highlights to be rendered according to the meter readings and see if they match what actually happens when you make a print. You'll have to adjust your visualization to agree with the realities of the medium; that's the real learning curve.

With experience, you'll know what your going to get before you release the shutter, where printing problems will be, what you need to dodge and burn, etc. And, if you find your shadows are not exposed enough for your taste, you can adjust E.I. or change development times if your negative contrast isn't getting you in the ballpark most of the time. Field notes help here.

As far as contractions and expansions are concerned (N- and N+ development times): Most contrast control can be done with VC papers these days, but there are still times you need to contract or expand development. However, you don't need to aim exactly for a particular paper grade/contrast filtration (as was necessary with graded papers in the past). So, just think that N-1 is about 20% less development than N and N+1 is about 20% more (again, you can adjust these later if needed).

Scenes that in the classic ZS would require N-1 or N+1 development can be dealt with easily by developing at N and using a different contrast filtration to make up the difference. When you run into a scene that the classic ZS would call N-2 or N-3, just develop N-1 and deal with the rest of the contrast control with your VC paper range (e.g., N-1 development with a #1 filter when your N is a #3 filter = N-3). The same with expansions; for N+2 and N+3 situations, just develop N+1 and use higher-contrast filtration to make up the difference.

That will get you more than started. Remember, if you don't use the visualization aspect of the ZS, you aren't really using the ZS, just ensuring adequate exposure and a negative with a usable contrast range. Being able to see in your mind's eye what you're results will be before making the exposure is the real advantage.

Best,

Doremus

I'm also with Nicolas above, but I rate the film typically at box speed of -1/3 stop. For N+ and N- exposure and development, I see no shortcut to a proper film test with your favorite equipment and developer.

 

[Kino]

BTW, I have good a good quality scan of the (blank) "Kodak Curve-Plotting Graph Paper" form if anyone wants a copy...

 

[Paul Howell]

Although rather detailed and not for someone who does not want to understand the math, Beyond the Zone System is an option. I have not done a deep dive myself, I have only read Phil Davis's book, but a guy near me sells turitial on CDs and will test film and developer for $50.00. BTZS will only work for sheet film. He also carries a good selection of large format gear.

viewcamerastore

viewcamerastore

viewcamerastore.com

 

[Augustus Caesar]

Which format do you use? What sort of subject matter? What do you expect the zs to do for you?

 

[MattKing]

BTW, I have good a good quality scan of the (blank) "Kodak Curve-Plotting Graph Paper" form if anyone wants a copy...

Is that the same as this pdf?: https://125px.com/docs/techpubs/kodak/y30.pdf

 

[Kino]

Is that the same as this pdf?: https://125px.com/docs/techpubs/kodak/y30.pdf

No, here it is in reduced resolution:

 

[RalphLambrecht]

BTW, I have good a good quality scan of the (blank) "Kodak Curve-Plotting Graph Paper" form if anyone wants a copy...

Oh, yes please to ******** or post it here.
{Moderator edit: please don't post personal email addresses in public posts. The Private Conversation system is ideal for that.}

 

[RalphLambrecht]

No, here it is in reduced resolution:

View attachment 376940

thanks a bundle. very kind of you.

 

[Kino]

Oh, yespease to rlambrec@ymail.com or post it here.

Will what I posted do or do you need a larger file?

I made an absurdly large scan of it but reduced it 75% for the above posting.

EDIT: OK. Let me know if it's too low in resolution and I will email a better copy.

 

[MattKing]

@Kino and @RalphLambrecht - you should talk

 

[Kino]

I'm done.

 

[Hassasin]

And in the end don’t forget that AA and all others, after all the implied perfection of pre-visualstion, testing, measuring, tuning of development times, and so on, they often enough spent countless hours correcting that perfection in the darkroom, dodging, burning, and in fact many a times entirely altering what they had claimed to have visualised in the first place.

ZS is good to learn how things interact. Do take its premises with some grain of salt, so the love of your life you met last night still holds some promise in the morning.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Will what I posted do or do you need a larger file?

I made an absurdly large scan of it but reduced it 75% for the above posting.

EDIT: OK. Let me know if it's too low in resolution and I will email a better copy.

I'll be looking forward to your email.

 

[tykos]

I'm also with Nicolas above, but I rate the film typically at box speed of -1/3 stop. For N+ and N- exposure and development, I see no shortcut to a proper film test with your favorite equipment and developer.

we should also note that these -1/3, -2/3, -42 stops mostly depend on how the user meters the scene.
Slight differences in what can be considered zone 2 vs 3, different wanted results, different type of scenes (vegetation vs. studio vs. portraits), inconscious corrections due to experience all contribute to a different film rating, that's why the personal testing, even if not conducted scientifically, is important.

 

[clar260]

Technically if you want to calibrate to the Zone System criteria you would begin by using an EI 2/3 stop lower than ISO speed. Then you figure out your development times for normal, minus, plus.

Thanks!

 

[clar260]

I second Tykos. Start with a 15-20% reduction in the developer manufacturer's recomended development time. Be wary of the Massive Development Chart.

If the shadows in your negatives are too thin then drop the EI. If the highlights are too dense then drop the development time. And vice-versa, of course.

Take pictures of your normal subjects. Print with a #3 filter to judge the results. You are aiming for a print that pleases you, not us.

Reading Adams' "The making of 40 photographs" I found that almost none of his iconic images were made with the Zone System. The Zone System, as practiced by Adams, made him take boring photographs. I guess if you are going to go the plodding Zone System path then the spontaneity in taking the picture is killed.

That may explain my setting the meter at 2/3-1/2 the box speed, dropping the development time 15% and not bothering with all the place/fall folderol, and just get on with taking the picture.

Thanks, Nicholas and Tykos, too. I think I understand now.

 

[BrianShaw]

And in the end don’t forget that AA and all others, after all the implied perfection of pre-visualstion, testing, measuring, tuning of development times, and so on, they often enough spent countless hours correcting that perfection in the darkroom, dodging, burning, and in fact many a times entirely altering what they had claimed to have visualised in the first place.

ZS is good to learn how things interact. Do take its premises with some grain of salt, so the love of your life you met last night still holds some promise in the morning.

This post is worthy of being plagiarized for use as a Revised Introduction, or perhaps a Postscript, in the next printing of Adams’ The Negative.

 

[Milpool]

Not really. The Zone System speed point falls 2/3 stop below the ISO speed point by definition, which is why when people go through the whole EI process, on average pretty much everyone ends up with a so-called “personal EI” 1/2 to 1 stop below the ISO speed. That’s why when someone asks about a simpler way to set themselves up with the Zone System, it is reasonable to suggest skipping the superfluous exposure index work.

we should also note that these -1/3, -2/3, -42 stops mostly depend on how the user meters the scene.
Slight differences in what can be considered zone 2 vs 3, different wanted results, different type of scenes (vegetation vs. studio vs. portraits), inconscious corrections due to experience all contribute to a different film rating, that's why the personal testing, even if not conducted scientifically, is important.

 

[Milpool]

This post is worthy of being plagiarized for use as a Revised Introduction, or perhaps a Postscript, in the next printing of Adams’ The Negative.

I agree. I think most people would do better to read Book 3 first, and then perhaps something like Kodak’s Basic Sensitometry Workbook. It becomes fairly obvious that The Negative could be distilled down to a pamphlet, and that the way in which great prints are made is by working on printing, not working on making negatives. People get lost in this notion of great negatives. In fact that part of the process is more or less trivial. Give your negative sufficient exposure and that’s pretty much it, like it or not.

 

[pentaxuser]

My advice is to forget the testing for personal E.I. and just rate your film 2/3-stop slower than box speed to begin with (note: this is not 2/3 box speed, but 2/3-stop...).

Doremus

I am a little confused now. Is this not the same thing? If I have a 400 speed film then I just rate it at 250 which is two x one thirds slower than box speed

If there a difference here between rating your film 2/3 slower than box speed and 2/3 stop?

Thanks

pentaxuser