Re: zone system and large format film

Bravo! Bravo . . . bravisimo!

>From the mouth of AA, including the self depricating passages.

Wel stated. Very very well stated.

S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Etienne Garbaux" <photographeur@softhome.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: zone system and large format film

> Chris wrote:
>
>> It seems that people have
>> migrated to a Zone VII highlight, and contracted the zones to fewer.
>> Minor White in his book from the 60's says that paper changed and
>> got more compressed and that is why the change. Is this true?
>> Techiegeeks, PLEASE enlighten me, especially those who used papers
>> from early on (30's-60's) until now....Condenser enlargers, VC paper,
>> #2 filter as normal.
>
> Well, I haven't been around long enough to use papers from the '30s, '40s,
> or '50s, but I'll take a stab anyway. Zones are supposed to be PRINT
> values. The whole point of the Zone System is to MAP subject luminances
> through the camera, negative, and printing process to the desired PRINT
> values (zones). So, if there has been a change in "real" zones it would
> only be because modern papers have a different Dmin and Dmax compared to
> older papers. And they don't. What they do have, in some cases, are
> different H&D curves (log exposure vs. log density) from older papers.
> This does *not* affect "real" zones -- the things Ansel Adams meant by
> "zones" -- the print density values. Simply put, you expose and develop
> to
> get the important values to fall where you want them with a straight
> print,
> then you dodge and burn (and these days, use different VC filters) and
> bleach and intensify to get the rest of the values where you want them.
> Generally, but not always, you choose the two limits -- the luminance
> values that you want to have texture in the shadows and highlights -- and
> let everything else fall where it will in between, satisfied that all of
> the important scene luminances will be mapped onto "useful" portions of
> the
> print value scale. Choice of film, paper, and to a much lesser extent,
> developer, allows one to tweak the mid zones around by using the different
> H&D curves available. (For the advanced worker, non-proportional reducers
> and intensifiers are additional tools for this purpose.)
>
> Sadly, partly because of a lack of understanding (Minor White appears to
> have been the first of many to not quite "get" it), and partly because
> others have thought they saw a better way, the term "zone" has been
> applied
> to the values at every stage of the process -- scene luminance values,
> negative density values, print exposure scales, and print density values.
> [St. Ansel is not entirely blameless here -- he let his wording get sloppy
> at times.] One rather well-known photo educator even developed a "zone
> system" for incident light metering -- the very anthesis of mapping
> specific scene luminances to print density values! (Not to say that the
> system doesn't work -- it's just not the zone system.) So nowadays, many
> zonies talk past each other because a "zone" is this amorphous thing.
>
> My advice: either (1) delve deep into sensitometry until you understand
> the
> mapping inside and out, in which case you will rise to a level of
> sensitometric enlightenment above the zone system (this is really not that
> hard); or (2) expose plenty to get the darkest textured shadows you care
> about up off the toe of the film's H&D curve, and develop so that the
> brightest textured highlight is still on the linear part (or just into the
> shoulder) of the film's curve. The latter, simple approach will give you
> somewhat dense but beautifully detailed negatives that are generally easy
> to print. When you get the hang of it, you can adjust development so that
> the highlights are at just the right density so that the negatives have
> exactly the right density range for your printing process. (This assumes
> that your film will develop sufficient density for your process. Some
> films -- notably HP5+ -- have difficulty reaching sufficient highlight
> density for the low-contrast alt processes [salted paper, cyano, plain Pt,
> etc.]). And lo and behold, you will have "backed into" the zone system
> with hardly any effort!
>
> I have found over many years of experience that "bulletproof" negatives --
> ones with a high density range, though with highlights that are not
> blocked
> -- make the best prints (where "best" is defined as achieving good
> separation of all tonal values and smooth tonal gradations). In other
> words, make somewhat hard and dense negatives and learn to love Grade -1,
> 0, 1, and 1-1/2 paper. An added side benefit is that one's negatives will
> come much closer to suiting both silver-gelatin and alt processes.
>
> Best regards,
>
> etienne
>
>
Received on Thu Sep 29 02:10:31 2005