the other zones

>As a sidebar to this dialog, John Sexton jokes about forming an
>organization concerned with proper Zone System metering. S.P.A.Z. is the
>Society for the Prevention of Abuse to Zones. As he puts it, too many
>photographs are fixated with placing shadows on Zone III when they
>belong somewhere else (often darker). The result is a dull print (albeit
>lush with shadow detail) that feels rather lifeless.
>
>Personally, I have always been drawn to Brett Weston's advice, "Don't be
>afraid of photographic black." His amadol blacks could be scrumptious.

I think I made this mistake for a long time. But then I accidentally
made some "underexposed" negatives that printed beautifully.

Now I try to find a zone II when I'm metering also. I decide on a
black place in the print ahead of time. If there aren't any black
places the print looks dull to me. Of course you have to let go of
your obsession with "shadow detail" in those black places. Then Zone
III obviously is the area that meters the next step up, and it does
have shadow detail.

I was thinking about this recently when I was photographing a house
in New Orleans that had been flooded. There were lots of dark murky
places. If those places weren't very dark, the feeling of the
oppressive heat, mold, and standing water would be lost. (Haven't
processed those yet so I don't know if I succeeded, but I tried to
find zone II in all of them.)

But, what about Zone I? I never look for it. Wonder if I should?
And what about VIII? I ignore it too.

--shannon
Received on Thu Sep 29 08:43:35 2005