Re: zone system and large format film

Chris,

If you read the various authors (at various times) they all say
something different as you have observed. I think one of the pitfalls
of learning the Zone System is that people initially take the books as
Gospel, including those written by Saint Ansel. Stuff varies between
individuals, as it should. The system, as Ansel points out in the
beginning paragraph of "The Negative," is concerned primarily with
(pre-)visualization and all the numbers are just means to an end.

Perhaps what has changed the most over time is taste and visualization.

I would suggest that the placement of reflectances and the development
manipulations are really dependent on what sort of enterprise one is
involved in. For example, a portrait photographer might be more
concerned with skin tones and N+ might be from zone V to VI. For a
landscape photographer, snow may be the critical subject highlight value
and therefore N+1 might be from Zone VII to VIII. These are very
different interpretations of the system which produce very different
results.

Also, most people starting out don't have a clue as to what the paper
will handle in terms of density. Best to take a 21-step wedge and see
what density reproduces which print value. Then, you can have personal
target values for the various zones.

To paraphrase White, Zakia, and Lorenz, sophisticated photographers use
9, 10, 0r 11 zones as "normal". Bottom line is: I wouldn't worry about
the books but rather personalise the numbers, targets and manipulations
for personal application and materials.

Joe

>>> zphoto@montana.net 09/28/05 8:17 PM >>>
Well, I'm getting up my nerve to ask a sort of non alt question--but at
least it does deal with large negatives!

When you all are out in the field, do you generally place your shadows
on
Zone III and highlights on Zone VII or Zone VIII?? What happened in
between
Adams' zone system and Carson Graves et al? 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.
Chris
Received on Thu Sep 29 10:12:04 2005