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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
I don’t understand this “pre”-visualization nonsense. That could be anything that happens before visualization, like getting out of bed.
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.
I don’t understand this “pre”-visualization nonsense. That could be anything that happens before visualization, like getting out of bed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?