Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
The Truth About the Zone System
Page 1 of 4 next> last>>
Apr 25, 2018 20:13:20   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
The truth about the Zone System- as it stands today.

There has been a number of posts pertaining to the status, the revival and art of black and white photography. Theses are good and interesting questions having to do with pre-visualizing subjects in monochromatic form, converting color images to black and white and the aesthetics of black and white as opposed to color.

Inescapably and logically, in theses conversations, the subject of the Zone System and its inventor, foremost proponent and practitioner Ansel Adams emerges. Undoubtedly, Adams was the grand master of his genre and his work and methodology is something that all serious photographers should study and appreciate. Although the system, in its original form, was entirely dedicated to film based black and white photography, there are aspects that can be applied to certain facets of color photography and modern digital photography as well.

Those of us that know and love the Zone System understand its basis of assigning specific steps of the gray scale to key elements in the scene or subject. Many photographers consider the system as the optimum approach, especially to fine black and white photography and therefore advise others who are seeking advice on the subject to pursue and adopt the method.

The problem I see is that SOME of this advice is based on a peripheral knowledge of the original concept rather than all and all it entails. To help clarify things for those who are interested I am posting this, not as a tutorial on the method but a realistic and perhaps simplified overview of if the original practice and what can be applied to today's technologies. Obviously, the Adams system long predates the advent of digital imaging and it is originally film based. The process entails precise coordination of exposure and darkroom technique. There is quite a bit of sensitometry involved in that understanding of the characteristic curves and other aspects of black and white film emulsions was essential. Serious practitioners would determine through testing, their own A.S.A. or ISO ratings based on their equipment, choice of film and developer combinations. Rather than a film or developer manufacturer's recommendations, each photograph would establish their customized exposure INDEX.

Back in the day, reflected light meters had an analog readout and a separate calculator dial. There reading was transfer to the dial which indicated an exposure value and a series of aperture and shutter speed settings based one the value. There were also other points on the dial that indicated exposure alternatives within the latitude of the film- kind of a dynamic range concept. Besides other customized changes in interpreting theses readings, Adams deigned an overlay for the dial with ZONE indications. The “O” and “U” indicators on the original dial were very significant in that much of the system was based on intentional and carefully measured over or under exposure with compensatory processing procedures.

Perhaps, this is an oversimplification but the basic idea was intentional overexposure and under-development reduces or compresses contrast. Intentional under exposure and extended development will increase contrast. Because “pull” processing could cause uneven development and the resulting streaks and inconsistencies in density, the film had to be immersed in a pre-soak bath prior t development in order to slightly soften the emulsion and slow down the initial activity of the developer. Underexposed and push processed film could lack shadow detail s it was important to use softer working film and developer combinations to provide a long toe, that is, a characteristic curve of the film that would make for better shadow detail . Some photographers used a special Pyro staining developer that left a residual yellow stain in the shadows that would automatically “hold back” some of the light during enlarging. Many enlarging papers were less sensitive to yellow light- built in selective dodging!

Analog printing methods were somewhat complex as well in that there were many contrast grades of enlarge papers and numerous paper developers with both soft and hard working characteristics. As if theses were not enough variables to contend with and standardize, there were three different kinds of enlargers; point source, condenser and diffusion and later on, cold light each with its own contrast and grain rendering characteristics.

Many of the finer finer printing papers had their quirks as well. This “nostalgia” about “watching the image materialize in the developer” wasn't all that much of a thrill- it was hard and precise work. You had to judge the density under a very dim safe-light and the rate at which it came up was an indication of whether or not you exposed the paper correctly. You needed to make certain that all the chemicals were temperature controlled and remember that over immersion in the stop-bath could cause water soak, a breakdown of the paper base, or over immersion in the fixer could cause bleaching of the image. Some papers had a significant degree of “dry down” which meant that a print that looked perfectly exposed in the fixer and wash water would become unacceptably darker when dry. There was allot of good old fashioned eyeballing in the darkroom sink!

I mention much of this because some have suggested that the best black and white work means reverting back to film and the classic Zone System. Unless someone is already experienced and fully equipped for the old process, it is highly unlike that anyone could easily replicate the entire system not would the want to. Even for experienced workers, sadly enough, much of the films, materials and chemicals are no longer in manufacture or easily obtained. It is also notable that original was intended for large format sheet or cut film where by each sheet could be individually or batch processed accordingly.

Over the years, there have been some practical adaptations of the method for roll films, certain color films and of course, digital photography.

As I alluded to earlier, this is not a tutorial on the system. There are many online and published tutorials on the Zone System in digital technology. There is the Chroma-Zone method for color workers.

So...what's my experience and history with the Zone System? Many decades ago I was heavy involved in black and white photography, mostly on a commercial basis. I was doing a good volume of advertising and product work where good reproduction of my prints was an ongoing requirement.- that was my day job. On weekends, I was shooting weddings in black and white- color was not as popular and commonplace as yet. I was dealing with white detailed wedding dresses and black formal-wear and was very interested fine print quality. Black and white portraiture was also one on my “first loves”.

I obtained, studied and attempted to memorize all of the Adams books and began to press some of the techniques into practical use and adopt the methods for other than landscape photography. A few years later, I attended an Adams workshop and among other wonderful experiences, I watched the master producing photo-murals form 8x10 negatives in a horizontally oriented enlarger mounted on tracks. The funny thing is I never wanted to become a landscape or nature photographer nor did I have dreams or delusions that I was gonna be the next Ansel. What I took away from the study and experience is a number of sound workable techniques that I could apply to my own work. For those who are interested in its application to their own work, the best approach is to EXTRACT the theories and techniques that apply to your kind of work.

There are certain theories that only apply to film. In portraiture, my film method was to expose for the shadows and the print down for the highlights. That works well in both black and white and color NEGATIVE work but in transparency and digital work, there is little or no latitude for the degree of overexposure that would be involved and the highlights would likely be blown out.

Colored filters, that were originally intended for black and white film photography, do indeed work well in digital. I have achieved good results in contrast control in panchromatic rendition and in traditional darkening of blue skies, accentuating cloud formations, lightening and darkening skin tones and lighting foliage. Theses effects are immediately observable on the LCD screen if you camera has a monochromatic mode. If this can be done in shooting, it will save time and effort in post processing.

I hope this helps to clarify some aspects of the Zone System.

Reply
Apr 25, 2018 20:37:17   #
sxrich
 
Certainly was a dynamite post.

Reply
Apr 25, 2018 21:32:38   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
The truth about the Zone System- as it stands today.

There has been a number of posts pertaining to the status, the revival and art of black and white photography. Theses are good and interesting questions having to do with pre-visualizing subjects in monochromatic form, converting color images to black and white and the aesthetics of black and white as opposed to color.

Inescapably and logically, in theses conversations, the subject of the Zone System and its inventor, foremost proponent and practitioner Ansel Adams emerges. Undoubtedly, Adams was the grand master of his genre and his work and methodology is something that all serious photographers should study and appreciate. Although the system, in its original form, was entirely dedicated to film based black and white photography, there are aspects that can be applied to certain facets of color photography and modern digital photography as well.

Those of us that know and love the Zone System understand its basis of assigning specific steps of the gray scale to key elements in the scene or subject. Many photographers consider the system as the optimum approach, especially to fine black and white photography and therefore advise others who are seeking advice on the subject to pursue and adopt the method.

The problem I see is that SOME of this advice is based on a peripheral knowledge of the original concept rather than all and all it entails. To help clarify things for those who are interested I am posting this, not as a tutorial on the method but a realistic and perhaps simplified overview of if the original practice and what can be applied to today's technologies. Obviously, the Adams system long predates the advent of digital imaging and it is originally film based. The process entails precise coordination of exposure and darkroom technique. There is quite a bit of sensitometry involved in that understanding of the characteristic curves and other aspects of black and white film emulsions was essential. Serious practitioners would determine through testing, their own A.S.A. or ISO ratings based on their equipment, choice of film and developer combinations. Rather than a film or developer manufacturer's recommendations, each photograph would establish their customized exposure INDEX.

Back in the day, reflected light meters had an analog readout and a separate calculator dial. There reading was transfer to the dial which indicated an exposure value and a series of aperture and shutter speed settings based one the value. There were also other points on the dial that indicated exposure alternatives within the latitude of the film- kind of a dynamic range concept. Besides other customized changes in interpreting theses readings, Adams deigned an overlay for the dial with ZONE indications. The “O” and “U” indicators on the original dial were very significant in that much of the system was based on intentional and carefully measured over or under exposure with compensatory processing procedures.

Perhaps, this is an oversimplification but the basic idea was intentional overexposure and under-development reduces or compresses contrast. Intentional under exposure and extended development will increase contrast. Because “pull” processing could cause uneven development and the resulting streaks and inconsistencies in density, the film had to be immersed in a pre-soak bath prior t development in order to slightly soften the emulsion and slow down the initial activity of the developer. Underexposed and push processed film could lack shadow detail s it was important to use softer working film and developer combinations to provide a long toe, that is, a characteristic curve of the film that would make for better shadow detail . Some photographers used a special Pyro staining developer that left a residual yellow stain in the shadows that would automatically “hold back” some of the light during enlarging. Many enlarging papers were less sensitive to yellow light- built in selective dodging!

Analog printing methods were somewhat complex as well in that there were many contrast grades of enlarge papers and numerous paper developers with both soft and hard working characteristics. As if theses were not enough variables to contend with and standardize, there were three different kinds of enlargers; point source, condenser and diffusion and later on, cold light each with its own contrast and grain rendering characteristics.

Many of the finer finer printing papers had their quirks as well. This “nostalgia” about “watching the image materialize in the developer” wasn't all that much of a thrill- it was hard and precise work. You had to judge the density under a very dim safe-light and the rate at which it came up was an indication of whether or not you exposed the paper correctly. You needed to make certain that all the chemicals were temperature controlled and remember that over immersion in the stop-bath could cause water soak, a breakdown of the paper base, or over immersion in the fixer could cause bleaching of the image. Some papers had a significant degree of “dry down” which meant that a print that looked perfectly exposed in the fixer and wash water would become unacceptably darker when dry. There was allot of good old fashioned eyeballing in the darkroom sink!

I mention much of this because some have suggested that the best black and white work means reverting back to film and the classic Zone System. Unless someone is already experienced and fully equipped for the old process, it is highly unlike that anyone could easily replicate the entire system not would the want to. Even for experienced workers, sadly enough, much of the films, materials and chemicals are no longer in manufacture or easily obtained. It is also notable that original was intended for large format sheet or cut film where by each sheet could be individually or batch processed accordingly.

Over the years, there have been some practical adaptations of the method for roll films, certain color films and of course, digital photography.

As I alluded to earlier, this is not a tutorial on the system. There are many online and published tutorials on the Zone System in digital technology. There is the Chroma-Zone method for color workers.

So...what's my experience and history with the Zone System? Many decades ago I was heavy involved in black and white photography, mostly on a commercial basis. I was doing a good volume of advertising and product work where good reproduction of my prints was an ongoing requirement.- that was my day job. On weekends, I was shooting weddings in black and white- color was not as popular and commonplace as yet. I was dealing with white detailed wedding dresses and black formal-wear and was very interested fine print quality. Black and white portraiture was also one on my “first loves”.

I obtained, studied and attempted to memorize all of the Adams books and began to press some of the techniques into practical use and adopt the methods for other than landscape photography. A few years later, I attended an Adams workshop and among other wonderful experiences, I watched the master producing photo-murals form 8x10 negatives in a horizontally oriented enlarger mounted on tracks. The funny thing is I never wanted to become a landscape or nature photographer nor did I have dreams or delusions that I was gonna be the next Ansel. What I took away from the study and experience is a number of sound workable techniques that I could apply to my own work. For those who are interested in its application to their own work, the best approach is to EXTRACT the theories and techniques that apply to your kind of work.

There are certain theories that only apply to film. In portraiture, my film method was to expose for the shadows and the print down for the highlights. That works well in both black and white and color NEGATIVE work but in transparency and digital work, there is little or no latitude for the degree of overexposure that would be involved and the highlights would likely be blown out.

Colored filters, that were originally intended for black and white film photography, do indeed work well in digital. I have achieved good results in contrast control in panchromatic rendition and in traditional darkening of blue skies, accentuating cloud formations, lightening and darkening skin tones and lighting foliage. Theses effects are immediately observable on the LCD screen if you camera has a monochromatic mode. If this can be done in shooting, it will save time and effort in post processing.

I hope this helps to clarify some aspects of the Zone System.
The truth about the Zone System- as it stands toda... (show quote)


Thanks for taking the time to share this EL. We all benefit when pros like yourself are willing to share their wealth of experience. For me, reading Ansel Adam’s “trilogy” and “discovering” the zone system was a revelation.

Reply
 
 
Apr 25, 2018 21:41:10   #
whwiden
 
Thank you for these observations. I have two questions. Do you have any rules of thumb for shooters of bw 35mm roll film? Second, I was intrigued by your suggestion to use colored filters for digital. That goes against the conventional wisdom. For bw roll film, I have different approaches for different films. For 400 speed film, I usually rate the film lower, say 200, and then expose for the shadows, etc. If I must push a roll in low light, I use a different development method, etc. For digital, I under expose and recover shadows in post, etc.

Reply
Apr 25, 2018 22:58:19   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
whwiden wrote:
Thank you for these observations. I have two questions. Do you have any rules of thumb for shooters of bw 35mm roll film? Second, I was intrigued by your suggestion to use colored filters for digital. That goes against the conventional wisdom. For bw roll film, I have different approaches for different films. For 400 speed film, I usually rate the film lower, say 200, and then expose for the shadows, etc. If I must push a roll in low light, I use a different development method, etc. For digital, I under expose and recover shadows in post, etc.
Thank you for these observations. I have two ques... (show quote)



It is not unusual to expose black and white or even color negative films at a lower than recommended IOS rating. As I alluded to in my original post, many photographer establish their own exposure indexes based on the kid of negatives the lie to work with, works well with their choice of chemistry or is making certain to provide sufficient shadow detail.

At one time, there was a policy at Kodak to underrate all their negative films, usually by one stop, as what the termed a safety factor. Many amateur photographs used the services of consumer photo finishing labs and the concept was based on the idea that an overexposed negative would generally yield a better print that an underexposed one. The film latitude also provided some flexibility. At one point the did away with the safety factor but usually included in there data sheets the fact that ISO ratings were offered at a starting point for photographer to test and make revision to accommodate their own equipment and working methods. 35mm and roll color negative films sicn as KodaK Portra will yield better saturation and tighter grain structures weh overexposed by one stop.

To employ the zone system with 35mm or roll film cameras, many photographer would work with multiple bodies and segregate the film as to normal or plus or minus development procedures.

As for filtration: As far as I can tell from my results, black and white images from digital cameras in monochrome mode, have approximately the same panchromatic rendition as many popular black and white emulsion and react to filters in the same way. A yelly filter will slight darked a blue sky, a red one will provide a more dramatic effect, a green filter will darken a skin tone and lighten foliage etc.

The entire subject of filters usually brings on controversy in that some photographers feel the degrade the image and increase the potential for flare, however, high quality filters have been used by discriminating photographers for years with excellent results. Others profess that they can create the same effects in post processing, that is in digital photography, - perhaps in some cases that is true but I find it more efficient to produce the effect I need in camera and asses the results right on the spot.

In another thread on black and white photography, there is an ongoing argument about filters vs. post processing treatments. One photographer posted a color shot of a white bird against a blue sky and the showed a post processing black and white version where the sky was rendered as jet black. He argued that that effect could not be accomplished with a filter. He is right, however, although it is a striking high contrast black and white rendition, it is not natural. Filter usage usually will produce a more subtle effect or are used to separate colored elements in an image that would record, monochromatically, in the same tone of gray- this is to restore contrast in elements that would blend together without filtration.

Reply
Apr 25, 2018 23:43:58   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
It is not unusual to expose black and white or even color negative films at a lower than recommended IOS rating. As I alluded to in my original post, many photographer establish their own exposure indexes based on the kid of negatives the lie to work with, works well with their choice of chemistry or is making certain to provide sufficient shadow detail.

At one time, there was a policy at Kodak to underrate all their negative films, usually by one stop, as what the termed a safety factor. Many amateur photographs used the services of consumer photo finishing labs and the concept was based on the idea that an overexposed negative would generally yield a better print that an underexposed one. The film latitude also provided some flexibility. At one point the did away with the safety factor but usually included in there data sheets the fact that ISO ratings were offered at a starting point for photographer to test and make revision to accommodate their own equipment and working methods. 35mm and roll color negative films sicn as KodaK Portra will yield better saturation and tighter grain structures weh overexposed by one stop.

To employ the zone system with 35mm or roll film cameras, many photographer would work with multiple bodies and segregate the film as to normal or plus or minus development procedures.

As for filtration: As far as I can tell from my results, black and white images from digital cameras in monochrome mode, have approximately the same panchromatic rendition as many popular black and white emulsion and react to filters in the same way. A yelly filter will slight darked a blue sky, a red one will provide a more dramatic effect, a green filter will darken a skin tone and lighten foliage etc.

The entire subject of filters usually brings on controversy in that some photographers feel the degrade the image and increase the potential for flare, however, high quality filters have been used by discriminating photographers for years with excellent results. Others profess that they can create the same effects in post processing, that is in digital photography, - perhaps in some cases that is true but I find it more efficient to produce the effect I need in camera and asses the results right on the spot.

In another thread on black and white photography, there is an ongoing argument about filters vs. post processing treatments. One photographer posted a color shot of a white bird against a blue sky and the showed a post processing black and white version where the sky was rendered as jet black. He argued that that effect could not be accomplished with a filter. He is right, however, although it is a striking high contrast black and white rendition, it is not natural. Filter usage usually will produce a more subtle effect or are used to separate colored elements in an image that would record, monochromatically, in the same tone of gray- this is to restore contrast in elements that would blend together without filtration.
It is not unusual to expose black and white or eve... (show quote)


I’ll have to experiment with this and compare the results. Traditionally, I and other B&W film photographers typically kept a yellow K1 filter on as a default (to increase contrast, especially between clouds and sky). I’ll be interested to see how filtering optically vs digitally compares. I may post the comparative results.

Reply
Apr 26, 2018 00:03:47   #
LarryFB Loc: Depends where our RV is parked
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
The truth about the Zone System- as it stands today.

There has been a number of posts pertaining to the status, the revival and art of black and white photography. Theses are good and interesting questions having to do with pre-visualizing subjects in monochromatic form, converting color images to black and white and the aesthetics of black and white as opposed to color.

Inescapably and logically, in theses conversations, the subject of the Zone System and its inventor, foremost proponent and practitioner Ansel Adams emerges. Undoubtedly, Adams was the grand master of his genre and his work and methodology is something that all serious photographers should study and appreciate. Although the system, in its original form, was entirely dedicated to film based black and white photography, there are aspects that can be applied to certain facets of color photography and modern digital photography as well.

Those of us that know and love the Zone System understand its basis of assigning specific steps of the gray scale to key elements in the scene or subject. Many photographers consider the system as the optimum approach, especially to fine black and white photography and therefore advise others who are seeking advice on the subject to pursue and adopt the method.

The problem I see is that SOME of this advice is based on a peripheral knowledge of the original concept rather than all and all it entails. To help clarify things for those who are interested I am posting this, not as a tutorial on the method but a realistic and perhaps simplified overview of if the original practice and what can be applied to today's technologies. Obviously, the Adams system long predates the advent of digital imaging and it is originally film based. The process entails precise coordination of exposure and darkroom technique. There is quite a bit of sensitometry involved in that understanding of the characteristic curves and other aspects of black and white film emulsions was essential. Serious practitioners would determine through testing, their own A.S.A. or ISO ratings based on their equipment, choice of film and developer combinations. Rather than a film or developer manufacturer's recommendations, each photograph would establish their customized exposure INDEX.

Back in the day, reflected light meters had an analog readout and a separate calculator dial. There reading was transfer to the dial which indicated an exposure value and a series of aperture and shutter speed settings based one the value. There were also other points on the dial that indicated exposure alternatives within the latitude of the film- kind of a dynamic range concept. Besides other customized changes in interpreting theses readings, Adams deigned an overlay for the dial with ZONE indications. The “O” and “U” indicators on the original dial were very significant in that much of the system was based on intentional and carefully measured over or under exposure with compensatory processing procedures.

Perhaps, this is an oversimplification but the basic idea was intentional overexposure and under-development reduces or compresses contrast. Intentional under exposure and extended development will increase contrast. Because “pull” processing could cause uneven development and the resulting streaks and inconsistencies in density, the film had to be immersed in a pre-soak bath prior t development in order to slightly soften the emulsion and slow down the initial activity of the developer. Underexposed and push processed film could lack shadow detail s it was important to use softer working film and developer combinations to provide a long toe, that is, a characteristic curve of the film that would make for better shadow detail . Some photographers used a special Pyro staining developer that left a residual yellow stain in the shadows that would automatically “hold back” some of the light during enlarging. Many enlarging papers were less sensitive to yellow light- built in selective dodging!

Analog printing methods were somewhat complex as well in that there were many contrast grades of enlarge papers and numerous paper developers with both soft and hard working characteristics. As if theses were not enough variables to contend with and standardize, there were three different kinds of enlargers; point source, condenser and diffusion and later on, cold light each with its own contrast and grain rendering characteristics.

Many of the finer finer printing papers had their quirks as well. This “nostalgia” about “watching the image materialize in the developer” wasn't all that much of a thrill- it was hard and precise work. You had to judge the density under a very dim safe-light and the rate at which it came up was an indication of whether or not you exposed the paper correctly. You needed to make certain that all the chemicals were temperature controlled and remember that over immersion in the stop-bath could cause water soak, a breakdown of the paper base, or over immersion in the fixer could cause bleaching of the image. Some papers had a significant degree of “dry down” which meant that a print that looked perfectly exposed in the fixer and wash water would become unacceptably darker when dry. There was allot of good old fashioned eyeballing in the darkroom sink!

I mention much of this because some have suggested that the best black and white work means reverting back to film and the classic Zone System. Unless someone is already experienced and fully equipped for the old process, it is highly unlike that anyone could easily replicate the entire system not would the want to. Even for experienced workers, sadly enough, much of the films, materials and chemicals are no longer in manufacture or easily obtained. It is also notable that original was intended for large format sheet or cut film where by each sheet could be individually or batch processed accordingly.

Over the years, there have been some practical adaptations of the method for roll films, certain color films and of course, digital photography.

As I alluded to earlier, this is not a tutorial on the system. There are many online and published tutorials on the Zone System in digital technology. There is the Chroma-Zone method for color workers.

So...what's my experience and history with the Zone System? Many decades ago I was heavy involved in black and white photography, mostly on a commercial basis. I was doing a good volume of advertising and product work where good reproduction of my prints was an ongoing requirement.- that was my day job. On weekends, I was shooting weddings in black and white- color was not as popular and commonplace as yet. I was dealing with white detailed wedding dresses and black formal-wear and was very interested fine print quality. Black and white portraiture was also one on my “first loves”.

I obtained, studied and attempted to memorize all of the Adams books and began to press some of the techniques into practical use and adopt the methods for other than landscape photography. A few years later, I attended an Adams workshop and among other wonderful experiences, I watched the master producing photo-murals form 8x10 negatives in a horizontally oriented enlarger mounted on tracks. The funny thing is I never wanted to become a landscape or nature photographer nor did I have dreams or delusions that I was gonna be the next Ansel. What I took away from the study and experience is a number of sound workable techniques that I could apply to my own work. For those who are interested in its application to their own work, the best approach is to EXTRACT the theories and techniques that apply to your kind of work.

There are certain theories that only apply to film. In portraiture, my film method was to expose for the shadows and the print down for the highlights. That works well in both black and white and color NEGATIVE work but in transparency and digital work, there is little or no latitude for the degree of overexposure that would be involved and the highlights would likely be blown out.

Colored filters, that were originally intended for black and white film photography, do indeed work well in digital. I have achieved good results in contrast control in panchromatic rendition and in traditional darkening of blue skies, accentuating cloud formations, lightening and darkening skin tones and lighting foliage. Theses effects are immediately observable on the LCD screen if you camera has a monochromatic mode. If this can be done in shooting, it will save time and effort in post processing.

I hope this helps to clarify some aspects of the Zone System.
The truth about the Zone System- as it stands toda... (show quote)


Although I have read several books on the zone system, and a basically understand it, I haven't really used it. But one thing I remember was that Ansel liked to use Tri-X film and developed it with HC-110.Well having used Plus X developed in whatever was recommended (I can't remember the name of the developer) and having some success, I tried Tri-X developed in HC-100 and was overwhelmed. It was counter-intuitive to use a fast film (Tri-X with a recommended ASA of 400, with an active developer like HC-110). After a few rolls of film that became my go to film and developer.

Although the above paragraph doesn't apply to the subject. I just want to say that Ansel Adams was one of the greatest photographers ever. I respect what he created with the zone system (along with oher people like Minor White).

I guess this is my way of thanking you for your post.

Reply
 
 
Apr 26, 2018 03:48:48   #
BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
The truth about the Zone System- as it stands today.

There has been a number of posts pertaining to the status, the revival and art of black and white photography. Theses are good and interesting questions having to do with pre-visualizing subjects in monochromatic form, converting color images to black and white and the aesthetics of black and white as opposed to color.

Inescapably and logically, in theses conversations, the subject of the Zone System and its inventor, foremost proponent and practitioner Ansel Adams emerges. Undoubtedly, Adams was the grand master of his genre and his work and methodology is something that all serious photographers should study and appreciate. Although the system, in its original form, was entirely dedicated to film based black and white photography, there are aspects that can be applied to certain facets of color photography and modern digital photography as well.

Those of us that know and love the Zone System understand its basis of assigning specific steps of the gray scale to key elements in the scene or subject. Many photographers consider the system as the optimum approach, especially to fine black and white photography and therefore advise others who are seeking advice on the subject to pursue and adopt the method.

The problem I see is that SOME of this advice is based on a peripheral knowledge of the original concept rather than all and all it entails. To help clarify things for those who are interested I am posting this, not as a tutorial on the method but a realistic and perhaps simplified overview of if the original practice and what can be applied to today's technologies. Obviously, the Adams system long predates the advent of digital imaging and it is originally film based. The process entails precise coordination of exposure and darkroom technique. There is quite a bit of sensitometry involved in that understanding of the characteristic curves and other aspects of black and white film emulsions was essential. Serious practitioners would determine through testing, their own A.S.A. or ISO ratings based on their equipment, choice of film and developer combinations. Rather than a film or developer manufacturer's recommendations, each photograph would establish their customized exposure INDEX.

Back in the day, reflected light meters had an analog readout and a separate calculator dial. There reading was transfer to the dial which indicated an exposure value and a series of aperture and shutter speed settings based one the value. There were also other points on the dial that indicated exposure alternatives within the latitude of the film- kind of a dynamic range concept. Besides other customized changes in interpreting theses readings, Adams deigned an overlay for the dial with ZONE indications. The “O” and “U” indicators on the original dial were very significant in that much of the system was based on intentional and carefully measured over or under exposure with compensatory processing procedures.

Perhaps, this is an oversimplification but the basic idea was intentional overexposure and under-development reduces or compresses contrast. Intentional under exposure and extended development will increase contrast. Because “pull” processing could cause uneven development and the resulting streaks and inconsistencies in density, the film had to be immersed in a pre-soak bath prior t development in order to slightly soften the emulsion and slow down the initial activity of the developer. Underexposed and push processed film could lack shadow detail s it was important to use softer working film and developer combinations to provide a long toe, that is, a characteristic curve of the film that would make for better shadow detail . Some photographers used a special Pyro staining developer that left a residual yellow stain in the shadows that would automatically “hold back” some of the light during enlarging. Many enlarging papers were less sensitive to yellow light- built in selective dodging!

Analog printing methods were somewhat complex as well in that there were many contrast grades of enlarge papers and numerous paper developers with both soft and hard working characteristics. As if theses were not enough variables to contend with and standardize, there were three different kinds of enlargers; point source, condenser and diffusion and later on, cold light each with its own contrast and grain rendering characteristics.

Many of the finer finer printing papers had their quirks as well. This “nostalgia” about “watching the image materialize in the developer” wasn't all that much of a thrill- it was hard and precise work. You had to judge the density under a very dim safe-light and the rate at which it came up was an indication of whether or not you exposed the paper correctly. You needed to make certain that all the chemicals were temperature controlled and remember that over immersion in the stop-bath could cause water soak, a breakdown of the paper base, or over immersion in the fixer could cause bleaching of the image. Some papers had a significant degree of “dry down” which meant that a print that looked perfectly exposed in the fixer and wash water would become unacceptably darker when dry. There was allot of good old fashioned eyeballing in the darkroom sink!

I mention much of this because some have suggested that the best black and white work means reverting back to film and the classic Zone System. Unless someone is already experienced and fully equipped for the old process, it is highly unlike that anyone could easily replicate the entire system not would the want to. Even for experienced workers, sadly enough, much of the films, materials and chemicals are no longer in manufacture or easily obtained. It is also notable that original was intended for large format sheet or cut film where by each sheet could be individually or batch processed accordingly.

Over the years, there have been some practical adaptations of the method for roll films, certain color films and of course, digital photography.

As I alluded to earlier, this is not a tutorial on the system. There are many online and published tutorials on the Zone System in digital technology. There is the Chroma-Zone method for color workers.

So...what's my experience and history with the Zone System? Many decades ago I was heavy involved in black and white photography, mostly on a commercial basis. I was doing a good volume of advertising and product work where good reproduction of my prints was an ongoing requirement.- that was my day job. On weekends, I was shooting weddings in black and white- color was not as popular and commonplace as yet. I was dealing with white detailed wedding dresses and black formal-wear and was very interested fine print quality. Black and white portraiture was also one on my “first loves”.

I obtained, studied and attempted to memorize all of the Adams books and began to press some of the techniques into practical use and adopt the methods for other than landscape photography. A few years later, I attended an Adams workshop and among other wonderful experiences, I watched the master producing photo-murals form 8x10 negatives in a horizontally oriented enlarger mounted on tracks. The funny thing is I never wanted to become a landscape or nature photographer nor did I have dreams or delusions that I was gonna be the next Ansel. What I took away from the study and experience is a number of sound workable techniques that I could apply to my own work. For those who are interested in its application to their own work, the best approach is to EXTRACT the theories and techniques that apply to your kind of work.

There are certain theories that only apply to film. In portraiture, my film method was to expose for the shadows and the print down for the highlights. That works well in both black and white and color NEGATIVE work but in transparency and digital work, there is little or no latitude for the degree of overexposure that would be involved and the highlights would likely be blown out.

Colored filters, that were originally intended for black and white film photography, do indeed work well in digital. I have achieved good results in contrast control in panchromatic rendition and in traditional darkening of blue skies, accentuating cloud formations, lightening and darkening skin tones and lighting foliage. Theses effects are immediately observable on the LCD screen if you camera has a monochromatic mode. If this can be done in shooting, it will save time and effort in post processing.

I hope this helps to clarify some aspects of the Zone System.
The truth about the Zone System- as it stands toda... (show quote)

Wow! A great post and an outstanding simplification of the Zone System. Thank you. When I started processing in the seventies, I tried using the Zone System for exposure and processing. I also tried to judge the times for development, stop bath and fixing by what I could see under the safe light. My walls were covered with print failures! It did not take me long to realize that I did not have a talent (nor the patience) for this kind of processing. Switching to strict temperature control when processing film and prints worked much better for me. BUT I was using Plus-X Pan and Microdol, a combination not highly recommended. When I switched to D-76, my negatives showed more latitude and I could work more easily with my prints. I then tried again with the Zone System and, although I never came close to mastering it, I began to understand the concept. By the way, during the day, I always used a yellow or, more commonly, a yellow-orange filter on my lens, primarily for dramatic effect.

Reply
Apr 26, 2018 06:01:15   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
LarryFB wrote:
Although I have read several books on the zone system, and a basically understand it, I haven't really used it. But one thing I remember was that Ansel liked to use Tri-X film and developed it with HC-110.Well having used Plus X developed in whatever was recommended (I can't remember the name of the developer) and having some success, I tried Tri-X developed in HC-100 and was overwhelmed. It was counter-intuitive to use a fast film (Tri-X with a recommended ASA of 400, with an active developer like HC-110). After a few rolls of film that became my go to film and developer.

Although the above paragraph doesn't apply to the subject. I just want to say that Ansel Adams was one of the greatest photographers ever. I respect what he created with the zone system (along with other people like Minor White).

I guess this is my way of thanking you for your post.
Although I have read several books on the zone sys... (show quote)


You are welcome and thanks for your response.

Tri-X in HC110 Dilution "B" was a fine film developer combination. That developer had similar properties to D-76 another of my old favorites for good gradations and grain. Plus-X was a slower and less grainy material but could exhibit a bit more contrast. It could pe processed in HC-110, D-76 or Microdol-X, depending on the effect you wanted to achieve.

One important darkroom technique I did practice was extremely tight temperature control in the film process and minimizing "wet time". All films are vulnerable to reticulation, that is, a softening and shifting of the emulsion from its base. In extreme cases of overheating in the chemicals or was or to high a temperature differential between baths it cases extreme grain. What many photographer did not realize is that even slight overheating or temperature differentials cause less noticeable reticulation and exaggeration of grain among other defects. Under diluted or too strong stop baths and fixers can also "shock" the emulsion and exacerbate the reticulation. I found that treating black and white film as if it were color material and maintaining strict temperature control, ideally at 68 degrees (F) in all the baths and miniimizing wet time could produce 35mm and medium format negatives of quality very similar to large format negatives in acutance and fine grain. I was also careful that stop bath was not too strong, a rapid fixer was used as well as a hypo clearing agent to minimize wash time. Air drying as opposed to forced drying also factored in. Turbulent agitation was also a quality killer- I used to tell my trainees in the darkroom that the processing tank was not a Martini shaker! Gently!

This is not off topic. Anyone who studied and admired the work of Adams understands that precise and patient darkroom work is an important aspect of fine photography.

Reply
Apr 26, 2018 06:02:44   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
The truth about the Zone System- as it stands today. ...

I hope this helps to clarify some aspects of the Zone System.

Those of us who read and understood the primary Zone System books, The Negative and The Print, found them interesting and even fascinating. They provided a good foundation for our later work in photography. But most of us took it all in, used what we learned and moved on. You are unlikely to find a single photographer who actually uses the Zone System without their own personal shortcuts or simplifications.

The one thing that we cannot escape is that the descriptions of the zones apply to the print. Look at their descriptions at Zone System in the section labeled Zones as tone and texture. Those descriptions can be applied to any form of print or displayed image.

Exposure "zones" are an entirely separate issue. With digital you can capture many stops of dynamic range, even more with film, but it takes work to get them into the print.

You can only display about 5 print zones that have any color and no more than nine that have any tonality.

Reply
Apr 26, 2018 06:13:15   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
... As far as I can tell from my results, black and white images from digital cameras in monochrome mode, have approximately the same panchromatic rendition as many popular black and white emulsion and react to filters in the same way. A yelly filter will slight darked a blue sky, a red one will provide a more dramatic effect, a green filter will darken a skin tone and lighten foliage etc. ....

The conventional wisdom is right. "Approximately the same" is just not as good as.

There is more flexibility available when applying the color filtration during the raw conversion. You can vary the strength of the filtration using colors for which you might not have a physical filter or gel of a single specific color and strength.

Reply
 
 
Apr 26, 2018 06:27:25   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
... I found that treating black and white film as if it were color material and maintaining strict temperature control, ideally at 68 degrees (F) in all the baths and miniimizing wet time could produce 35mm and medium format negatives of quality very similar to large format negatives in acutance and fine grain. ...

That may be easy for some, especially if you live in a cold climate.

Speaking for those of us who live in a warmer environment, developing B&W film at room temperature is more practical - in my case, between 70 and 75F in air conditioning. It's a simple matter to adjust development times from 75F using an app. Development at 75F is about 70% of the time for 68F.

Reply
Apr 26, 2018 06:31:05   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
BHC wrote:
Wow! A great post and an outstanding simplification of the Zone System. Thank you. When I started processing in the seventies, I tried using the Zone System for exposure and processing. I also tried to judge the times for development, stop bath and fixing by what I could see under the safe light. My walls were covered with print failures! It did not take me long to realize that I did not have a talent (nor the patience) for this kind of processing. Switching to strict temperature control when processing film and prints worked much better for me. BUT I was using Plus-X Pan and Microdol, a combination not highly recommended. When I switched to D-76, my negatives showed more latitude and I could work more easily with my prints. I then tried again with the Zone System and, although I never came close to mastering it, I began to understand the concept. By the way, during the day, I always used a yellow or, more commonly, a yellow-orange filter on my lens, primarily for dramatic effect.
Wow! A great post and an outstanding simplificati... (show quote)


Film development is most certainly a time/temperature intensive process. Print development can be timed and temperature controlled as well but there is still a degree of visual judgement that comes with experience.

One of the aspects of film photography that many photographers were and are not aware of is that various films have different panchromatic sensitivities. Panchromatic films are supposed to be sensitive to all colors or segments of the visible spectrum, however, different films may be more sensitive to one wavelength or color than others. The data books, issued by Kodak, had wedge spectrograms that indicated the sensitivities of each of their black and white products. Many of the popular films were very sensitive to BLUE and therefore would render blue skies much lighter than desirable so the K-2 (Yellow) and Orange filters were very popular among landscape photographers. The Red (25A) filter could produce very dramatic skyscapes.

The Zone System is not terribly complex, that is, once you get used to it. Adams was a magnificent teacher, he kept no secretes and laid it all out in his books and workshops. All the rest is practice and patience. Applying ti to digital photography should be an easy transition.

Reply
Apr 26, 2018 06:48:39   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
... Many of the popular films were very sensitive to BLUE and therefore would render blue skies much lighter than desirable so the K-2 (Yellow) and Orange filters were very popular among landscape photographers. The Red (25A) filter could produce very dramatic skyscapes. ...

The filtration affects not only the appearance of the blue sky, it also changes the brightness of anything illuminated primarily by the blue sky and not the sun, specifically shadows.

A yellow, orange or red filter will proportionately increase the contrast between the sunlit portion of a scene and the sky-lit parts.

Reply
Apr 26, 2018 07:07:12   #
agambrell
 
Great original posting! For anyone in Florida, or visiting Florida, I suggest a stop at Clyde Butcher's gallery in Naples, Florida. A tour of his darkroom is fascinating. On the Internet you can find some videos of him creating his wall sized prints, but I found actually being in the room and seeing all of the large trays and special equipment up close to give me more appreciation for his process.

Reply
Page 1 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.