Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,949   Posts: 1,557,882   Online: 904
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 47
  1. #11
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Milton, DE, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,980
    Blog Entries
    29
    Images
    19
    OK. I see. Not just a time but a time with a specific value placement in mind.
    Thank you.
    CWalrath
    APUG BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE
    DE Darkroom

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  2. #12
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,625
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Shangheye View Post

    In summary, what I think you are saying is that I should just expose to place it at VIII and develop normally...right?

    Rgds, Kal
    I hope not! In the Zone System, you expose to place a shadow zone and develop to let a highlight fall on a highlight zone.

    As someone said, it's up to the photographer to determine where he or she want's the zones to be, but artistically-limit me would develop to let a white shutter in sunlight fall on Zone VIII.
    Regards

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

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    I hope not! In the Zone System, you expose to place a shadow zone and develop to let a highlight fall on a highlight zone.
    This is true in "the field" almost all of the time. (As an example of the "almost", I just placed a highlight in "the field" yesterday, as a matter of fact: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum48/6...reme-pull.html.) However, the OP is testing for a normal development time, in which case you do place a highlight.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Shangheye View Post
    In summary, what I think you are saying is that I should just expose to place it at VIII and develop normally...right?
    Sort of. I am saying that to follow the way in the book, you'd expose it three stops over the reading. Then you would test at the manufacturer's recommended time. Then you would make a "normal" print and see where it fell. Then, depending on where it fell, you would make alterations if needed and do the same thing over again.

    IMO, shooting several shots at the same time is best on sheet film (or a whole roll with roll film), as it ensures that the quality of light is the same for each exposure, thus eliminates one possible variable that would arise from shooting on a different day and/or time.

    For roll film, you can just cut off part of the roll and develop it for the first round. For the second round, if necessary, you can cut off another piece. For the third round, another, and so on and so forth.

    Personally, I would say that you are fine calibrating to a zone VII...and you have already done that, so go out and shoot some pix, unless you want to find pluses and minuses first.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Belgium
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,095
    Images
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    This is true in "the field" almost all of the time. (As an example of the "almost", I just placed a highlight in "the field" yesterday, as a matter of fact: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum48/6...reme-pull.html.) However, the OP is testing for a normal development time, in which case you do place a highlight.
    That is right...I am trying to find the normal development time to place the hilight where I want it.

    In normal use in the field, I meter Zone III and reduce exposure by 2 stops.

    Thanks everyone, I actually feel calibrated for the first time!

    Rgds, Kal

    PS I have been using Incident metering for the last year (and before that average metering refelctive readings), but have felt very little control. It is convenient and "safe", and has it's uses...but I think the Zone System will allow me to be in control.
    Kal Khogali

    www.kal-khogali.com


    Visit my Photo Scrap Book

    www.shutteringeye.wordpress.com


    "Wake up, dream, and photograph what you have seen.
    Don't wake up, photograph, and dream of what could have been."

  6. #16
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,625
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    This is true in "the field" almost all of the time. (As an example of the "almost", I just placed a highlight in "the field" yesterday, as a matter of fact: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum48/6...reme-pull.html.) However, the OP is testing for a normal development time, in which case you do place a highlight.
    I know what you mean, but the terminology is quite not correct. This is probably just semantics, but AA is clear in his terminology. Shadows are 'placed' with exposure and ALL other tones 'fall' depending on development. When you pick a development to guide a certain highlight, all other tones adjust with it. This does (theoretically) not happen to placed shadows.

    Consequently, the difference between 'place' and 'fall' is that exposure places one tone and development makes all others fall. As I said, just semantics, however, it allows to be linguistically accurate when in rare cases you actually 'place' highlights, for example you expose for a high-key tone and adjust the development for the midtones.

    Just being picky me again.
    Regards

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

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Many a time, i wish AA had kept his teaching tool to himself. It causes more confusion than that it adds to what photographers (then) knew all along:
    expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights.

    I think that if we would start remembering that 'old thing' again, and forget about the entire ZS talk, life would be so much easier. Without giving up anything.

    Now, we even get discussions about whether something "falls" or is "placed"...
    How much further away from the matter at hand, exposing our films, will we allow the ZS to take us?

  8. #18
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,625
    Images
    1
    I said it before:

    Photographic science is highly sophisticated, but sometimes, it's utterly useless and happily misses the entire point of it all!

    ...and it is so much fun.
    Regards

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

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    I totally disagree. A placed tone is any tone that you decide to expose at the desired distance from middle grey (or at middle grey itself in some cases). The tones that "fall" are all other tones in relation to the placed tone on an exposure scale. They fall where they fall depending on their luminance relative to the placed tone. The term "fall" is independent of development, and relates to exposure only. Where things fall (in the case of high tones when low-toned placement has occurred), or where they are placed (in the case of high tones when high-toned placement has occurred), compared to what you want, is what determines what you do in development. "Fall" refers to relative luminance values and how they would be captured by the theoretical normal development resulting in the theoretical perfectly linear S curve. It does not refer to actual negative densities after N+ or N- processing. This is very clear in Ansel Adams' writing.

    In the example I posted from my pix the other day, I placed a highlight on zone IX. As a result, another bright area two EVs lower fell on zone VII on the exposure scale, and the dark areas fell wherever they fell on the exposure scale, because I did not care if they were totally black on the print. Even though I will be giving my film minus development so that the zone IX placement ends up being a density that will easily print to a zone VII-VIII, I still "placed" the highlight at zone IX, and the shadows still "fell" where they did. Again, "place" and "fall" relate only to how the exposure would be rendered if given normal development, not to how it will be rendered with N+ or N- development.

    The two words physically mean the same thing (where the tone will end up if given normal development), but one is chosen by the photographer (the "place"), and the others are dictated by their luminance values relative to the placed tone (the "fall"). A tone does not "fall" where it does via exposure and development; only in relation to a "placed" tone.

    Q.G. :I think it is difficult because people don't understand it, and try to come up with very different ways to describe it, when it is really a dreadfully simple theory and practice, IMO. IMO, it is a good tool because of its simplicity, and loses so much when people complicate it. As beginner, it really helped me a lot. Now, I use it when it suits the shot, and do not use it when it doesn't...but I do think that is is a helpful learning tool for some (many?) people. IMO, it really boils down to reading comprehension. Adams was an extremely clear writer, and what he wrote on it is enough to get it thoroughly, and as well as you need to get it.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 08-01-2009 at 08:14 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    Q.G. :I think it is difficult because people don't understand it, and try to come up with very different ways to describe it, when it is really a dreadfully simple theory and practice, IMO. IMO, it is a good tool because of its simplicity, and loses so much when people complicate it. As beginner, it really helped me a lot. Now, I use it when it suits the shot, and do not use it when it doesn't...but I do think that is is a helpful learning tool for some (many?) people. IMO, it really boils down to reading comprehension. Adams was an extremely clear writer, and what he wrote on it is enough to get it thoroughly, and as well as you need to get it.
    Oh, but i agree about it being usefull as a teaching tool.
    And perhaps as a crutch to lean on when we feel a bit lazy later on.
    No dispute there.


    It's just that the terminology, the elaborations, etc. all help to make a simple matter much more confusing than it needs to be.

    That, in turn, is helped by the mythical status the ZS has attained.

    Which, in turn, is because people do not understand what it is about: that extremely simple 'old thing' again: expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights.

    And that is because the terminology, the elaborations, etc. all help to [etc.]


    Adams too came up "with very different ways to describe it, when it is really a dreadfully simple theory and practice".

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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