Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,498   Posts: 1,543,120   Online: 1023
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31
  1. #1
    CPorter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,662
    Images
    24

    Obtaining print values as placed

    Greetings:

    Since teaching myself the rudiments of the ZS and obtaining my personal film speed for T-Max 400 (EI 250), I have a printing question regarding the corresponding print values. I'll reiterate the old maxims for my train of thought here: with film, we expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights; with printing, the maxim is we determine the best exposure time under the enlarger that yields the proper highlight density or tonality for the important highlight in the scene.

    Example: A scene of normal contrast range where my important shadow can be "placed" high enough on the scale while still maintaining my important highlight detail that "falls" on zone 7 or 8 (with normal development; I have not established minus or plus dev times yet).

    My printing question is this: Assuming that the printing maxim is true and that my personal film speed and normal development time is correct for my equipment and technique, does it hold that when the exposure under the enlarger is timed to obtain the zone 7 or 8 print value, then similarly, should that exposure time also correctly (or nearly correctly) print the shadow value as "placed" during the exposure of the film? It is assumed that doding and burning will most likely be needed to achieve the desired "place" and "fall" print values as I have yet to expose and develop a perfect negative, but I am interested in knowing if my thinking is correct as I have described it. At this point, I feel that I have a pretty good grasp of the ZS, but perhaps maybe something has not clicked yet when it comes to putting the image on paper.

    Please, I am only interested in comments from those that consider themselves ZS practioners that have some helpful information to pass on. No ZS bashing please; it would be unhelpful to respond otherwise.

    Thanks and have a good day.

    Chuck

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Your reasoning is correct provided the contrast of the negative matches the exposure scale of the paper.

  3. #3
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    Or to put it another way, after determining the exposure to correctly print the Zone VIII highlight details, you then alter contrast (which, depending on your contrast controls, may require redetermining exposure) to correctly place the Zone III shadow detail values. And then you burn and dodge like the dickens anyway...
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    193
    If all's calibrated, values should print where placed.

    In my experience, however, that's nice, but not the end. I often feel different about an image in the darkroom than I felt in the field, so for me "pre-visualization" (I hate that term. What can be before you visualize a photograph?) is the starting point, but I deviate from it when I print to make a more emotionally expressive print.

    Example: I'm printing a lot of large format portraits right now of 8th grade students. I know what the proofs look like, but the prints are dead - so I'm lightening up the skin tones and playing with contrast just until they glow. Wow! They loook great, but that's not what I photographed, and my concept of the prints has changed since I began working with them (read: I had to redo some).

    Moral: get good negatives, and then follow your heart. Better to be moving and exciting than technically correct. The Zone System is only a tool. A good one, but just a tool.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    You are correct as long as you have exposed/developed correctly for a chosen paper grade or VC filter and the print is properly exposed to yield the high value selected. The print must also receive appropriate complete development. For best process control the paper should be frozen between uses since it will change contrast and perhaps speed if stored for a period of time at room temperature. The print developer must be at the chosen temperture and the agigtation technique should be a consistent one as well as the processing time.

  6. #6
    juan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    St. Simons Island, Georgia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,641
    Images
    4
    Also remember that development of the print controls the low values - it's just the opposite of the negative. If, for instance, a correct exposure gives you the Zone VIII you want, but the shadows are still too light, you may be able to increase print development to darken the shadows. It depends on the paper and developer.
    juan

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    I think that it is important to amplify on what has already been stated. That placing values is only a beginning. If one literally translates a scene/object on the basis of the existing inherent luminance scale the photographic print is likely to be a literal translation as well.

    Truly moving images are usually at a departure from reality.

  8. #8
    Joe Lipka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    809
    "Truly moving images are usually at a departure from reality."

    Well said, Donald.
    Two New Projects! Light on China - 07/13/2014

    www.joelipkaphoto.com

    250+ posts and still blogging! "Postcards from the Creative Journey"

    http://blog.joelipkaphoto.com/

  9. #9
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,275
    Images
    20
    I agree and so did Ansel. The idea was to place the values as they appeared in the mind at the stage of pre-visualization, not as they could be measured in the world. One tests one's materials and measures the values in the scene to know how to achieve the mental vision with the materials at hand.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  10. #10
    CPorter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,662
    Images
    24
    Thanks for the responses.

    Regarding Claire's statement "....as long as you have exposed/developed correctly for a chosen paper grade or VC filter....."

    I use VC paper with a Kodak Polymax filter set. My understanding goes like this: filters are speed matched to return a middle gray value given the chosen exposure time i.e, meaning, a change from a #2 to #3 filter should provide the same mid-tone value at,say, 10 seconds-----with the noticeable contrast change mostly occuring globally and locally with the shadows getting darker and not the highlights necessarily getting lighter, perhaps some. Given that, how do I expose correctly for a particular filter number, when the paper's contrast is not fixed? Have I misunderstood the statement?

    Donald, is her statement along the same meaning of your first reply? I would appreciate some elaboration on both of those comments.

    Thanks
    Chuck

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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