Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,549   Posts: 1,544,646   Online: 684
      
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 66
  1. #11
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,535
    Images
    1
    Originally Posted by Bill Burk
    I'd like to be able to spot on a shadow and if I step down 4 zones, have it land on 0.1.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    Sorry, flare won't allow for any certainty.
    ... and especially not for Zone I. But, my question is: Why do you spot-meter for Zone I? Most people meter for Zone III or Zone IV. Zone I has no pictorial value.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  2. #12
    CPorter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,662
    Images
    24
    Shadow placements can be made anywhere on the toe of the curve---making a Zone I placement for a certain area may prove beneficial for the visualization and in controlling the highlight end of the scale. However, the area of important shadow detail for full texture should meter at least two zones higher in EV with that shadow placement. Doesn't Zone I have pictorial value in the sense it represents "the first step above complete black, slight tonality but no texture" in the print? I've never made a shadow placement that low, but I have on several occaisions on Zone II. A few of my portfolio pictures, while not great stuff, have shadow placements as low as Zone II.

  3. #13
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,291
    Images
    46
    I can easily change the calibration constant on the meter, and it's dedicated to one camera, one film.

    It's OK with me if flare pushes me above 0.1 density. I just don't want to go below.

    I have some leeway in my definition of quality because I use 4x5 on a tripod - I can tolerate a denser negative with higher grain than I could with 35mm. I can tolerate lower speed.

    I know the film speed when I develop to the ASA gradient. That's what I lock everything down to. With 0.1 as my speed point, my EI will be lower at N development which, due to less development time, doesn't give full film speed.

    Davis' Beyond the Zone System points out that the EI changes with different development times. I will know my film EI for different N by where the curves cross 0.1 density.

    Tell me if I am off my rocker here: I probably can account for flare by NOT changing my EI in response to it.

    Because...

    With N+ development, developing longer because of a short scale subject - there won't be much flare.

    When N- development, developing shorter to hold down the highlights - lots of flare. Flare will bring up the shadows.

  4. #14
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,864
    Why do you think that development can cause flare to change?
    f/22 and be there.

  5. #15
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    Tell me if I am off my rocker here: I probably can account for flare by NOT changing my EI in response to it.

    With N+ development, developing longer because of a short scale subject - there won't be much flare.

    When N- development, developing shorter to hold down the highlights - lots of flare. Flare will bring up the shadows.
    It's the other way around.

  6. #16
    CPorter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,662
    Images
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    Davis' Beyond the Zone System points out that the EI changes with different development times. I will know my film EI for different N by where the curves cross 0.1 density.
    But most likely with the extremes of "+" or "-" development times due to increases in fog with +2 and a decrease in fog with -2 or more---not with every change in development time. More fog from "N" will mean less log exposure needed to reach the threshhold and less fog from "N" means more log exposure needed to reach the threshhold. I have found that with +1 and -1, the increase and decrease in fog is not significant enough to alter speed. I have seen a +1/3 and a -1/3 change due to fog, but instead of changing EI, I make the adjustment with the expsoure and keep the EI constant.

    I'm sure Stephen will chime in, but flare changing with development? Not sure about that one, fog density changes with development.

  7. #17
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,291
    Images
    46
    I meant the extreme brightness of the subject that would lead to an N- development would be the kind of situation where there would be lots of flare.

    Steve, did you mean the cause versus effect as I clarified, or did you think short range subjects are more prone to flare
    Last edited by Bill Burk; 12-23-2010 at 12:29 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: clarification

  8. #18
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    I meant the extreme brightness of the subject that would lead to an N- development would be the kind of situation where there would be lots of flare.

    Steve, did you mean the cause versus effect as I clarified, or did you think short range subjects are more prone to flare
    Bill,

    A shorter luminance range has less flare so the reduction of the illuminance range at the film plane is less which mean it needs less development. Longer luminance ranges have highe flare resulting in shorter illuminances ranges at the film plane requiring higher CIs.

    Sorry Bill, I read your post wrong. I got the impression you were talking about development and flare. Yes, development will compensate for the effects of flare in the shadows. But nothing is ever straight forward with flare. Flare isn't just dependent on luminance range but also on tonal distributioin. A scene with a higher luminance range may have lower flare than a normal with normal luminance range. Although thinking about it, I think lower luminance rnage are less of a problem in this regard.
    Last edited by Stephen Benskin; 12-23-2010 at 01:50 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #19
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,535
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by CPorter View Post
    Shadow placements can be made anywhere on the toe of the curve---making a Zone I placement for a certain area may prove beneficial for the visualization and in controlling the highlight end of the scale. However, the area of important shadow detail for full texture should meter at least two zones higher in EV with that shadow placement. Doesn't Zone I have pictorial value in the sense it represents "the first step above complete black, slight tonality but no texture" in the print? I've never made a shadow placement that low, but I have on several occaisions on Zone II. A few of my portfolio pictures, while not great stuff, have shadow placements as low as Zone II.
    I'm in favor of anything that works. However, shadow placement in the Zone System is highly subjective at best. At Zone I, it's merely a guess, because Zone I is almost black, very close to Dmax. You'll find a hint of tonality there but may need a densitometer to be sure. In my view, you need more such as some texture to have pictorial value, but more importantly, visualizing Zone III is relatively easy, visualizing Zone I, on the other hand, is close to impossible (at least for me).

    I was amazed how my negatives improved after John Sexton went even further and suggested to start shadow placement with Zone IV instead of III. The results are negatives that have density where it matters most, still allowing for plenty of shadow detail. This can be done very reliably. As I said, Zone I placement is guesswork in comparison. Well, it was in my case and there may be exceptions.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  10. #20
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,535
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by CPorter View Post
    ... I'm sure Stephen will chime in, but flare changing with development? Not sure about that one, fog density changes with development.
    Bill and Steve already addressed this, and just to put what they said into different words: Development does not change flare, but we reduce development due to lighting conditions that usually come along with high flare. Therefore, N- development is typically dealing with more flare than N+ development.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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