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

[xtol121]

I wonder if the average photographer and the average viewer can tell the difference easily between a speed that is between the figures given by the range of film speeds on the camera's dial? By that I mean is it possible to easily see and appreciate the "improved quality of say an EI of 280 and either 320 or 250 which is what the film speed dials?

Ceteris paribus conditions being assumed, of course in such a test

pentaxuser

I don't think anyone's process control is tight enough to notice 1/6th of a stop (or whatever the math is for 1/2 vs 1/3 stop) from film to film and developing session to session. 1/3 of a stop will only show a difference to a densitometer and I don't believe that anyone will appreciate the difference in pictorial photography. And if what "makes" your picture is a third stop of exposure difference it must be a pretty boring picture.

As far as the whole film speed testing thing, in my experience the only difference you'll notice is in the confidence that you aren't leaving anything on the table. you'll ideally have complete faith that what you are metering is going to give you the tone that you have defined in your process. that confidence might make you more excited to photograph, and hopefully it alleviates any feeling of guessing if you aren't the type that likes to "guess" on pay per click film exposures.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I don't think anyone's process control is tight enough to notice 1/6th of a stop (or whatever the math is for 1/2 vs 1/3 stop) from film to film and developing session to session. 1/3 of a stop will only show a difference to a densitometer and I don't believe that anyone will appreciate the difference in pictorial photography. And if what "makes" your picture is a third stop of exposure difference it must be a pretty boring picture.

As far as the whole film speed testing thing, in my experience the only difference you'll notice is in the confidence that you aren't leaving anything on the table. you'll ideally have complete faith that what you are metering is going to give you the tone that you have defined in your process. that confidence might make you more excited to photograph, and hopefully it alleviates any feeling of guessing if you aren't the type that likes to "guess" on pay per click film exposures.

And that is why I shoot film at box speed and adjust the shadows with the Zone System exposure set the the shadow level I want instead of the same adjustment for all photographs.

 

[DREW WILEY]

General photography and technical photography standards differ, with the Zone System being within the arena of general photography, having less stringent demands. And yes, with regard to shadow value exposure, it is better to err on the side of caution, and still have wiggle room, rather than underexposing the subject unless you deliberately want that kind of look.

But too much caution has its own unfortunate side effects. I find it utterly ridiculous how certain Zone teachers tell their students to place their threshold of shadow gradation way up belly-button high on Zone 3 to accommodate gross metering errors. That just risks blowing the highlights out at the upper end, or else finding the only remedy in such aggressive minus or compensating development that all the upper scale and midtone life and sparkle gets scrunched into Baby Food blaah. Only with an exceptionally short scale film like Pan F does it make sense to do Z 3 shadow placements.

And there are exceptions for certain UV alt techniques which favor a "thick" overexposed overdeveloped negative. But with conventional silver gelatin printing, one should not overdo the overall density range.

And for those of us who cut our teeth on color chrome shooting and printing, a half stop error was not a misdemeanor, but a felony. In some technical black and white applications, you wanted to be within a tenth if possible. That was easier to do in controlled lab situations than in the field, using instruments much more sensitive than ordinary light meters, and development temp regulation within 1/10th F. But I'm personally glad I had a real taste of that in my background. After that, working with the Zone System seems more like firing a Blunderbuss shotgun rather than a sniper rifle; and it still seems a bit too imprecise for me unless I'm just out on a snapshooting binge. But for others it does give a beneficial sense of discipline and control.

 

[Paul Howell]

Learning the ZS starts with learning to visualize, although I took the Minor White course both AA and White started with students using cardboard cutout for 4X5 with 150mm lens and a dark filter. We spent 2 days wandering around looking through the frames and filters until we could visualize the scene in black and white. Next was learning to see the scene as you wanted to be represented in the final print. With a densitometer nailing the personal E.I for a given film and developer combination then plotting the curve and figuring out + - 1 to 2 took a day. We also learned to shoot a ring around, in the 60s most of us did not have access to a densitometry. The art also comes with thinkin which paper and paper developer to use and how to enhance with buring, dodging and so on.

For what ever reason many people get caught up in the mechanics of film testing and forget why AA and Fred Archer developed the ZS to begin with. If you do no visualize then it is a lot trouble for not much reward.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks for the reply xtol121. That was the conclusions I had more or less reached but thought it worth asking the question. There has to be a limit to how many film speeds a camera manufacturer can provide on a camera dial, of course but it seems to me that were there to be a noticeable difference in quality from negatives taken at such speeds as say 300 or 225 from those at 320 or 250 then you'd have thought that at least one intermediate speed between each of the usual 1/3rd stop values might have been included

pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

So it seems that camera manufacturers, and light meter manufacturers also, understand photography. That’s good to know.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

The whole object of "proper exposure" is to come as close to the minimum needed without going below it in order to optimize shutter speed and aperture possibilities and reduce graininess (with small film, especially). There is a whole stop or two of acceptable exposure above that which will produce equally excellent prints, maybe even more with large film where graininess is less of an issue.

What determines "proper exposure" is the density and printability of shadow details. There are really no standards here, just practical, empirical (and subjective) print evaluations - "first excellent print" and all that.

A large part of deciding on a personal E.I. is just how you, individually, want to render shadow detail. Some like the look of pushing: detailless shadows and stretched contrast. Some like fully-detailed luminous shadows and a long dynamic range. The Zone System can be used for both. Knowing your medium and how it works is the point, not some mechanical parroting of Ansel Adams sensibilities.

Most beginning photographers who complain about the quality of their prints could improve things dramatically by just giving more exposure to start with.

Nailing a ZS personal E.I. to a third of a stop one way or the other so that you are right at the point of minimum exposure is not only difficult but leaves no room for error. It's better to err on the side of slight overexposure than underexposure - period - no matter which size film you are using. Better to start learning the ZS with slight overexposure and adjust later than the other way around. When in doubt, overexpose a bit.

Best,

Doremus

"Most beginning photographers who complain about the quality of their prints could improve things dramatically by just giving more exposure to start with."

Yup! I noticed this back in 1972.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

But it always turns out to be such a good idea to look at the lens, because it increases the likelihood you'll notice the shutter is still open.

Hasn't helped me. I still leave the shutter open.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Alan - hard aperture stops make it harder to set precise increments. But there are behind the camera systems for setting everything in front, although they seem better adapted for studio use of a view camera than out in the field.

I just accept view camera lens adjustments as a slower but potentially more precise manner of working than with typical MF or 35mm gear.

That article you linked in plainly not ideal information with respect to large format work, where stops smaller than f/22 tend to be routine.

The Zone System itself primarily had large format sheet film first in mind, since sheets can be individually assigned to specific development categories. Carrying multiple roll film backs also facilitate that. Otherwise, it has to be based on the preponderance of images on any given roll, with an inevitable odd duck or two remaining to contend with in some other manner.

I only used the article link to show the full and fractional stop amounts on the strip to show that fractional stop amounts are not 1/3 or 2/3 multiple of full stops amounts, but rather use a Pi formula for the aperture areas. I didn't read the article other than that.

Regarding hard stops, having 1/3 hard stops seems pretty precise to me. Even the 1/2 hard stop on my Mamiya RB67 lenses can be slipped in-between the hard stops which would approximate 1/4 stops. I wonder if Seiko never bothered with hard stops on LF lens shutter asemblies because they just didn't want to bother with the expense. Does anyone have any history on this?

 

[Eric Rose]

I'm very sorry, but in my 60+ years of photography I have come to the conclusion that the Zone System is a big waste of time. Especially with todays films and papers.

Eric

 

[DREW WILEY]

Modern VC papers have provided us with degree of flexibility not so easy back in the days when graded papers were predominant. But it's still important to get to first base first, using thoughtful film exposure and development.

Learning the Zone System can be helpful to many in a couple of ways. First, it gives them a simplified practical model for pairing film results with print results. Second, it comprises a kind of common denominator street lingo which many black and white photographers communicate with each other by, whether they personally practice the Zone model or not. That would be my case - I learned it, but it's now basically way back in the rear view mirror for me.

And one can competently learn the ZS without any densitometer at all. But there are numerous other reasons for owning a transmission densitometer if your budget allows it.

One can certainly "pre-visualize" an endpoint without resorting to the Zone System, or, on the other hand,
make wonderful prints without worrying a whit about what the Previsualization Police think or not. I work so intuitively now that I rarely consciously think about such things at all. But that's the whole point - get so comfortable with your tool kit that using it becomes spontaneous, and frees you up pay closer attention to the more intangible qualities of imagery.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Modern VC papers have provided us with degree of flexibility not so easy back in the days when graded papers were predominant. But it's still important to get to first base first, using thoughtful film exposure and development.

Learning the Zone System can be helpful to many in a couple of ways. First, it gives them a simplified practical model for pairing film results with print results. Second, it comprises a kind of common denominator street lingo which many black and white photographers communicate with each other by, whether they personally practice the Zone model or not. That would be my case - I learned it, but it's now basically way back in the rear view mirror for me.

And one can competently learn the ZS without any densitometer at all. But there are numerous other reasons for owning a transmission densitometer if your budget allows it.

One can certainly "pre-visualize" an endpoint without resorting to the Zone System, or, on the other hand,
make wonderful prints without worrying a whit about what the Previsualization Police think or not. I work so intuitively now that I rarely consciously think about such things at all. But that's the whole point - get so comfortable with your tool kit that using it becomes spontaneous, and frees you up pay closer attention to the more intangible qualities of imagery.

I believe that previsualization is more important than 'absolute' sensitomitry.
The darkroom magazines of yesteryear were full of technically perfect examples of boring images.
AA said, there is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.

 

[DREW WILEY]

We have many advantages AA did not - much better film quality control, better meters, high quality VC papers, better lenses, etc. He developed many less than ideal negatives; others were damaged over time. This made printing and retouching a major chore sometimes. I once watched his print retoucher at work - the career definition of Purgatory. So I certainly wouldn't poo-poo refining the technical aspect.

But yes, Melvin, there have been a multitude of Ansel wannabees, but very few with his poetic sensibility.
I grew up in the Sierra where many of his most famous images were made, but ironically never saw a real print of his until I was exhibiting my own color prints in his own town! - when I'd walk around a bit checking out other galleries. He did have a special degree of sensitivity to the very kind of light I have appreciated my entire life, and developed the Zone System to make his own methodology more responsive to it. Right after he died, I was asked to share a major retrospective of his mural prints, with my big Cibachrome prints in between each of his big poetic monochrome ones. It was a surprisingly effective presentation. I only began b&w photog myself when the large format color side of it was becoming uncomfortably expensive. But I have done both parallel for many years now.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Do you know of a simple, easy to follow, process for setting up the Zone system. I'm happy to run the tests with my kit, just want to make sure I end up somewhere in the end.
-Rob

Which format do you use?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I believe that previsualization is more important than 'absolute' sensitomitry.
The darkroom magazines of yesteryear were full of technically perfect examples of boring images.
AA said, there is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.

Mel, what's previsualization to make pictures not boring?

 

[Milpool]

Aside from the recommendation to downrate the film by 2/3 stops, which obviates the need for “personal EI” “testing”, OP should also note a useful preamble to the Zone System would simplify things for the aspiring practitioner by indicating attempts at precision to small fractions of stops are misguided. There is enough uncertainty and slop to obliterate that, and it doesn’t matter.

Give sufficient exposure and the film easily does the rest. Then it’s up to you in the darkroom or software editor.

 

[BrianShaw]

Mel, what's previsualization to make pictures not boring?

Interesting subject and good composition, together with good exposure and good printing. All subjective so you can’t go wrong.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I really doubt all those Zone gurus who religiously preached Previsualization followed their own rules much of the time. No matter how good you get at this, certain negatives will always surprise you, or might lend several forms of interpretation during the printing session which can be dissimilar, yet equally rewarding. You never really know until you start printing them. That's part of the magic of it.

 

[BrianShaw]

Cynical thought yet probably 100% true. I’ve personally known 2 Zone system zealots. One practiced the art with a Honeywell Spotmatic 35mm camera and made exceptional prints in the St Ansel style. The other used various LF cameras and cult lenses and a cult light meter and cult enlarging equipment yet never showed a single print he made. In fact, once I admired a framed print he had on the wall and only after much discussion he admit that it was given to him in an APUG print exchange. Apparently someone saw a print he made but not me.

 

[Milpool]

I don’t understand this “pre”-visualization nonsense. That could be anything that happens before visualization, like getting out of bed.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I don’t understand this “pre”-visualization nonsense. That could be anything that happens before visualization, like getting out of bed.

Many threads on this already. Ansel Adams called it visualization, Minor White called it previsualization. Essentially the same concept, different word for it.

In Canada we write visualisation, not visualization. Still, same concept .

Pre-visualisation

Is he term pre-visualisation a con to make believe what was seen is how the outcome was controlled, when the outcome could be accidental to the MO?

www.photrio.com

Previsualization

Much has been said about Minor White's concepts around previsualization. It just could be some people according to this study just can't do it, period. Some are at the other end of the spectrum. Interesting reading anyway. What do you think about your ability to "previsualize"? Maybe get...

www.photrio.com

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm very sorry, but in my 60+ years of photography I have come to the conclusion that the Zone System is a big waste of time. Especially with todays films and papers.

Eric

Ansel Adams did not have the advantage of split grade printing which is a valuable tool with or without the Zone System.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Ansel Adams did not have the advantage of split grade printing which is a valuable tool with or without the Zone System.

He actually did, although it's hard to say whether or not he used it much. Ilford's Ilfospeed multicontrast paper was available since the 70s.

Multi-contrast paper and the split grade printing technique are very briefly mentioned in The Print : "...we can also use variable-contrast effects in individual print areas. For example, the No. 2 contrast filter may be appropriate for the overall values of an image, but some low values may require additional contrast, or some high values may need greater separation. We can then make the main exposure using one filter, and use a different filter for burning-in."

 

[Paul Howell]

I don’t understand this “pre”-visualization nonsense. That could be anything that happens before visualization, like getting out of bed.

I got to the Minor White workshop by default. I was attending college, my school did not offer photography but did offer a minor in photojournalism as it offer journalism. For some reason that I never understood, my school, LaVern College,got a grant to send one student to a workshop. This the 60s so it was big deal, travel, lodging and food. I was selected to go as I was the only student who had a 4X5, a speed graphic. Minor White was not amused. As a person who was training to be a photojournalist the idea of the ZS was a mystery. We spent 2 days learning to see (visualize or previsualize) in black and white. I cant say that I was an enthusiast, my usual format was and is 35mm. Still I do find it useful when shooting 4X5. Minor White was asked what he thought the difference was between visualization and pre visualization. I don't think he gave a answer that I could understand. In his book The Zone System Manual he writes.

Previsualition refers to the learnable power to look a scene person, or situation and "see" at the same time on the back of the eyelib or "sense" deep in the mind or body the various ways photography can render the subject. Then out of the all the potential rendering select one to photograph. Such selection makes up a large share of the photographer's creativity.

I have always used visualization.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I don't think it was a coincidence that Minor White looked just like the wild-eyed professor in Back to the Future. He certainly made some compelling prints; but he probably would have anyway without all the extra philosophical baggage.