Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,710   Posts: 1,482,947   Online: 1011
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39
  1. #21
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    11,583
    Images
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by MatthewDunn View Post
    I think I am going to take the approach of simply shooting at box speed, metering for the darkest part of the scene in which I want to preserve detail and then develop at normal, box speed recommended time. If I don't get enough detail, I will knock off a third off the box speed and try again. Once I am getting the right amount of detail, I will figure out the right development time based on how much contrast I have and how difficult it is to print.
    Good approach, but you are missing one small detail in your description (although I think you are probably including it in your thought process).

    After you take your meter reading, you need to decide whether that dark part of the scene should be rendered one, two, three or ? stops darker than 18% grey (Zone V) and then adjust your exposure to match that.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  2. #22
    MatthewDunn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Good approach, but you are missing one small detail in your description (although I think you are probably including it in your thought process).

    After you take your meter reading, you need to decide whether that dark part of the scene should be rendered one, two, three or ? stops darker than 18% grey (Zone V) and then adjust your exposure to match that.
    Actually, while I get that (placing my shadows in III or IV and then, through review of the negatives, making sure that there is enough detail in the shadows, i.e. that Zone III (or IV) is, in fact, III (or IV) and adjusting the film speed if necessary), the approach I was talking about is the one outlined on the rogerandfrances.com site (http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subsc...ps%20zone.html).

    Thoughts on that?
    "Once the amateur's naive approach and humble willingness to learn fades away, the creative spirit of good photography dies with it. Every professional should remain always in his heart an amateur." - Alfred Eisenstadt

  3. #23
    baachitraka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,075
    Depending on Film and Developer combo, metering shadows may lead to shadow fall on Zone IV. Say, Rodinal for example...

    If not lens flare may also contribute in bringing down the metered value close to a stop.

    For starting, it may a best bet to go with OP's way, i.e., box speed + metered shadows + develop according to manufacture recommendation.
    Last edited by baachitraka; 08-25-2013 at 05:54 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
    Rolleicord Va: Humble.
    Agfa Isolette III: Amazingly simple, yet it produces outstanding negatives.
    Holga 120GFN: EV 11 or EV 12.

  4. #24
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    2,915
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by MatthewDunn View Post
    Actually, while I get that (placing my shadows in III or IV and then, through review of the negatives, making sure that there is enough detail in the shadows, i.e. that Zone III (or IV) is, in fact, III (or IV) and adjusting the film speed if necessary), the approach I was talking about is the one outlined on the rogerandfrances.com site (http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subsc...ps%20zone.html).

    Thoughts on that?
    If you are interested in the Zone System, I wouldn't recommend taking advice from a site that gives 10 reasons not to use the Zone System.

    If you develop by time and temperature to manufacturer's recommendation, you MIGHT get rated box speed, and you MIGHT get a Contrast Index of 0.62. That's what I believe these charts aim to lead you to. You will get negatives you can print. But you will miss out on some of the understanding that comes when you test for film speed and development time.

    If you develop tests of Stouffer scale step wedges and read the results with a densitometer, and you make your own Time-CI chart and family of curves. You will know what speed you are getting and you can plan the development to fit your needs.

    Going forward if you include a step wedge exposure in with your normal developing runs, you will know whether you hit your predicted CI and can adjust processing or update your charts as needed.

    That's the approach I would recommend if you were to consult me, and like #10 of Roger and Frances, I'm sticking with that. Haa, no. If you want to discuss any other approach, I'm always willing to explore the strategy and pros and cons...

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,265
    Matthew, if you are interested in the Zone System, stick with Adams's books.

  6. #26
    MatthewDunn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    If you are interested in the Zone System, I wouldn't recommend taking advice from a site that gives 10 reasons not to use the Zone System.

    If you develop by time and temperature to manufacturer's recommendation, you MIGHT get rated box speed, and you MIGHT get a Contrast Index of 0.62. That's what I believe these charts aim to lead you to. You will get negatives you can print. But you will miss out on some of the understanding that comes when you test for film speed and development time.

    If you develop tests of Stouffer scale step wedges and read the results with a densitometer, and you make your own Time-CI chart and family of curves. You will know what speed you are getting and you can plan the development to fit your needs.

    Going forward if you include a step wedge exposure in with your normal developing runs, you will know whether you hit your predicted CI and can adjust processing or update your charts as needed.

    That's the approach I would recommend if you were to consult me, and like #10 of Roger and Frances, I'm sticking with that. Haa, no. If you want to discuss any other approach, I'm always willing to explore the strategy and pros and cons...
    My problem is that, coming from digital, I understood only the first sentence. The rest of it could have just as easily been written in ancient Abyssinian...

    I am trying to figure out the best way to bridge the gap from where I am now to where the point is at which I understand your post. Maybe a trip down PCH1 is in order...
    "Once the amateur's naive approach and humble willingness to learn fades away, the creative spirit of good photography dies with it. Every professional should remain always in his heart an amateur." - Alfred Eisenstadt

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,265
    Matthew, below are a few links to some easy introductory material on sensitometry/densitometry from Kodak. It will give you the basics, definitions, etc. The Zone System in Adams's The Negative is essentially a simplified introduction to applying some of these ideas to your own film exposure and processing with the desired final print in mind. It is nothing more than that. Adams does a good job introducing the basic concepts, but the Kodak publications might help.

    In addition, I've included a link to a brosder set of Kodak and Ilford resources I put together (the sensitometry workbook is one of them). Some of these publications are aimed at helping less experienced people gain an understanding of things like ISO vs personal exposure index (which ends up being part of the Zone System), etc. Stick with this stuff before getting everyone's opinions. Re-read Adams.

    http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploa...y_workbook.pdf

    http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploa...cs_of_Film.pdf

    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum216/...resources.html

  8. #28
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    2,915
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by MatthewDunn View Post
    The rest of it could have just as easily been written in ancient Abyssinian...
    Haaa, OK. You're welcome to stop by and be a guinea pig for the class I keep promising to teach "Calling your shots".

  9. #29
    winger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Page County, IA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,297
    Images
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by MatthewDunn View Post
    My problem is that, coming from digital, I understood only the first sentence. The rest of it could have just as easily been written in ancient Abyssinian...

    I am trying to figure out the best way to bridge the gap from where I am now to where the point is at which I understand your post. Maybe a trip down PCH1 is in order...
    Don't worry, I've been using film for around 35 years, knowing sorta what I was doing for maybe 15 years, and I can't completely get my head around some of the zone system stuff. The whole "place this reading on this zone" part is where they lose me. It also doesn't help that there are a LOT of people out there who don't quite "get it" but tell other people how to do it. Especially when reading about it, it's not an easy concept. I think seeing it is likely a much better way to learn it and to understand what's going on. For those of us who've never had a scientific approach to photography taught to us, it isn't easy to just pick up (I was taught by artistic types more than by technical ones). Those who do understand it might forget what it's like to be at the beginning.

  10. #30
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,293
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Mathew I think your are getting closer to a good plan. I do though think you are over thinking the digital to analog switch.

    If we use a handheld meter set at say 100 to determine our exposure setting, the setting determined from that meter readingwill work equally well for a digital camera set to 100 or an analog camera with 100 speed film.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin