lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Thank you for that post. I too am familiar with the Zone System and Ansel Adams and his instructional books. I have both series of the books. I've use the Zone system myself for 35mm B&W film (Plus-X). Even though I own 4x5" View Cameras and shoot 4x5" sheet film I don't do that often enough to get proper calibrations. Also it has been a long time since I've had access to a Densitometer.

I've read a few articles about the Zone System for Digital Photography, and found that helpful. I've worked at simplifying a digital zone system in my own mind for my own use and needs. There are Books published about the Zone System for Color (Film) Photography and Digital Photography. Though I can't think of any titles right now. For using the Zone System for digital photography it would help to have some mastery of Photoshop, ACR, or other pixel editor. Also it seems one needs to fully understand the relationship between "zones", "stops", "steps" and "tones". Things may not be all one to one.

E.L.. Shapiro: Are you saying to use colored B&W contrast filters over the lens of a digital camera only in JPG Monochrome Mode? How about RAW? Wouldn't a "filtered" Raw file be more effectively converted to B&W later with Ps or ACR, using the color channel sliders?

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Perhaps I should shut up and not prolong this thread any longer and let it scroll away into “Hog Heaven” or whatever place of obscurity old posts rest. I did, however, read all of the posts and comments and I wondered if we are missing anything. Have we debunked any myths? Have we failed to discover or rediscover anything about Adam's body of work. Unless any of us is a reincarnation of William Mortensen, we all can agree that Ansel Adams was a grand master of his era and his sphere and is deserving of our admiration and study.

Aside for the storied history, what have we to learn, in a practical or practicable sense, from a technology and methodology that emerged in the 1940s and was practiced in its entirety by relatively few photograhers to date. In my opinion, and some might disagree, my answer is EVERYTHING! If there is any mythology to dispel or at least argue against, it is some of the current folklore or attitudes that are omnipresent in our craft. Let's have a look.

Nowadays there is so much back and forth about “post processing” and manipulation and all this business about final images “right out of the camera”. What we should learn from Adams is a completely holistic and all encompassing approach to our craft. The darkroom is not considered a place of fakery or some sort of unethical alteration of the image but rather a straightforward and precise continuation of the camera work. Even after every effort is made to produce an ideal negative there still remains work to do in customized printing in order to realize all the information on the negative in terms of a full complement tones and “zones” on the final print. There are also important considerations such as selection of the proper paper grade, image tone and surface. Everything counts right up to the drying, mounting and displaying if the final print. Pre-visualization! To a fault! Even if you have never seen the inside of a “wet” darkroom, there is allot about this process that can be applied to digital photography. Control over contrast, saturation, and traditional methods of dodging, burning in, curves and so much more is all in the software and can be applied once the skills and knowledge are acquired and ascertained.

Adams was a stickler for precision and from his lectures, writings and the one incredibly wonderful workshop I participated in, I learned many things that I have since applied to all my work. Each part of the process is important and any carelessness, omission of important details or glossing over certain, even infinitesimal, technical elements can kill a perfectly fine image anywhere along its production. Sometimes when I mention, teach, or write about some of theses nuances or minute details, folks wave their hands, tell me that I am obsessive/compulsive, old school or just call me a fusspot!
I consider their “hand waving” a red flag and jokingly tell them that their negligence or waving off of certain minor details is gonna come back and bite them on their backside- someday soon!

I mean...you buy a zillion dollars worth of gear and drag all this stuff– heavy solid tripods, perhaps a bulky 8x10 view camera or a couple of fully loaded DSLRs with a ton of glass to some godforsaken mountaintop, at the risk of life and limb, to get an incredible viewpoint. You make precise spot readings and calculations, you shoot and somehow make it home intact. Then you blow the quality in the darkroom because of temperature fluctuations, bad water, some kind of chemical exhaustion or contamination or a timing or agitation issue. Nowadays, in digital photography, if we can manage to create good well crafted files, most post processing errors are reversible but there are still many precautions, nuances, and fine points in shooting that should not be neglected or negated in our technical approaches.

We often speak of the ZONE system but I prefer to call everything to do with Ansel Adams the “Adams Effect” in that all of his curriculum, if you will, was not only involved with the gray scale and all of its incarnations and complexities. Not enough is discussed about his use of light, composition and his mastery of camerawork. In his workshop he demonstrated how to hand crafted specialized lens shades to maximize the protection against contrast robbing flare especially when filters were employed. He emphasized how the time of day and the quality of existing light was in important factor in landscape photography and the fact that no amount of darkroom manipulation would impart texture on surfaces that were not in the right light at the time of exposure and sometimes just minutes could hold significant lighting changes. He professed that before closing the shutter and inserting the film holder- hesitate for a moment and survey the scene and the ground glass and observe and scrutinize the composition. He spoke of a rule of thumb for focal length selection. If you expect the perspective in the scene to match what you perceive with your eyes, use a focal length that is slightly longer than normal for the format. He also spoke about appropriate focal length selections, degrees of enlargement and viewing distances for the final print. This speaks to his holistic approach considering factors up to and including the size of the final print and where and how It will be viewed or displayed.

Of course, that workshop was a very long time ago and very few of us, theses days, are going to be assessing a scene at the back of a view camera or handling an 8x10 film holder any time soon or toiling in a wet darkroom. Many of us will never work with film or sensitized enlarging papers. I believe, however, that there are more similarities than differences between the film/analog/silver processes and toady's digital imaging. Artistically, aesthetically and even in some technical areas, the differences between latent images/silver halides/grain etc. and electrons/electromagnetic fields/pixels etc. are inconsequential to my artistic or creative sensibilities. It's nice to know how things work but as we said in Brooklyn, I ain't an engineer or a scientist, I'm a photographer! Light is still light, optics are improved, more efficient and acute but they still work the same way. Colors are colors and the gray scale is still gray! What with all the innovative photo-electronics, computer driven automation and unbelievably comprehensive editing software, all of the traditional camera and “darkroom” controls are still at our disposal only in a more convenient, accessible and safer configuration.

I don't feel that studying and learning the Zone System is mandatory for a photographer to have a firm grasp of his or her medium in today's technologically oriented craft. For those, however, who are experienced and have practiced it and those who wish to take the time to study it and its current applications to digital photography it certainly gives you more insight and an advanced heads up on many present-day concepts of dynamic range, tonal gradation, contrast control, panchromatic rendition of colors, conversion of color imagery to monochromatic form and much more.

There is a fun side to all this too. As a young geezer, having read all of Ansel Adam's Books and attending 2 lectures- one at a convention and the other at the New York camera Club and finally getting to one of his workshops, I was in awe! I used to think I was smart, tech-savvy, somewhat artistic and mechanically inclined but trying to process all that information- well, my head was ready to explode or implode! The workshop was over but a few of us were held over an extra day, waiting for a flight. Ansel was kind enough to invite us back to his darkroom to observe his printing of 3 photo-murals he was commissioned to produce. He used an enormous horizontal 8x10 enlarger running on rails. The thing seemd like a Volkswagen with a lens! He ran a few strip tests before he and two of his assistants placed the paper on the wall. In order to dodge and burn he just about had to do a dance in the light path- it was beautiful to watch and yet probably the funniest thing I had ever seen, to that point in time, that wasn't in a Jerry Lewis movie! After exposing the paper they immersed the print in a “tray”, as I recall, made of plastic sheeting stretched over a wooden frame. After fixing the print, he turned on the lights and inspected the image. He was not satisfied with the contrast and some of the dodging. They put up another sheet of paper and the dance began again. The print went into the trays and this time, upon inspection, there was a big grin on Ansel's face and I will never forget what he exclaimed. He simply said “Ahhhhh”!- like a man who just had a sip of fine brandy and was totally satisfied with life.

If one day, I somehow become memory impaired and forget everything I ever learned about photography, I will nonetheless never forget that dance, that smile and the inspiration and pride of workmanship and work ethic I learned from Mr. Adams.

lsupremo Loc: Palm Desert, CA

EL,

Great post, it brings back memories of my experience at a workshop with the master at Yosemite where the bottom line was to see and previsulize. He told us that “if you can’t make it bigger or more important don’t push the button. Just remember it for wha t it was”.

uote=E.L.. Shapiro]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.[/quote]

anotherview Loc: California

These two Web-sites further discuss the Zone System. Both tell how to use the Zone System with a digital camera.

www.alanrossphotography.com/can-the-zone-system-go-digital

www.outdoorphotographer.com/tips-techniques/nature-landscapes/the-digital-zone-system

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Excellent insights! Thanks

Charlie157 Loc: San Diego, CA

Charlie157 Loc: San Diego, CA

Thanks sharing the two web sites. Really good information, easy to understand.

Question. How is Zone 5 and the 18% grey card related ?

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

An 18% grey card, when "placed" on Zone V (that is, exposed by means of the camera's indexing system) will appear as the same middle grey as it does to the eye. If you meter of a white avalanche and place it as the norm, then it will also appear as middle grey. If you point your spot meter at a lump of coal in shadow, and set the exposure accordingly, it will also be the same middle grey.

In practice, that means that if you're metering a white or near white subject, you need to overexpose by 2-3 stops, and if you're shooting that lump of coal, you need to underexpose if you want it to look dark grey or black.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Hi Mike- Sorry I missed you question.

I have had good results with filters on the camera both in RAW and Jpeg. The results are much like traditional filters with panchromatic film. I have also had good results in PhotoShop especially if I am looking for more incremental or extreme effects. I have been successful using certain Zone System type contrast controls with both color negative and transparecy films. In low key portraiture, I would expose for the shadows and print down for the highlights and pre-soak the film in the C-41 process to preserve shadow detail. With Ektachrome, I would overexpose and pull process to cut down on excessive contrast when doing art reproduction with polarizing filters and polarized lights.

anotherview Loc: California

I understand the grey card represents the mid-grey point in the image.

You can also set the MGP in Photoshop, as well as the white point and the black point.

Charlie157 Loc: San Diego, CA

[quote=AndyH]An 18% grey card, when "placed" on Zone V (that is, exposed by means of the camera's indexing system) will appear as the same middle grey as it does to the eye]

Thanks for the response.

I understand that, what ever you meter on it comes out as 18% grey. My question is more of if you place a 18% card next to a Zone V card are they the same grey.

My question is also, I understand that the camera can see only a limited gradation of grey, from black to white, are the 10 Zones in the Zone System represent the gradation of grey that the camera sees

I understand that cameras that have a high range, from black to white, that the camera is actually putting shots/exposure s together to get the wider range

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

[quote=Charlie157]

Yes, that's pretty much it. If you print out a B/W photo with an area you've placed on Zone V, and place it next to an 18% grey card, they should have approximately the same value.

Charlie157 Loc: San Diego, CA

Thanks for the information