[soundview]

I'm completely new to film photography and after scouring the web for best practices and/or tips I am now more confused than when I started. Here's some nuggets (or duds) that I don't know what to do with:

*Learn the zone system? Don't learn the zone system?
*Expose for shadows and develop for highlights? Or, expose for highlights and develop for shadows? (Developing part won't apply to me since I'll be sending it out)
*Light meter everything? Forget light metering!

I know, I know... "just go out and shoot." I promise I will. I just need some advice to move me in the right direction.

So how about it friends? Waddya got?

[k100d]

expose for the shadows, the film has plenty of dynamic range to retain highlights
because of the wide exposure lattitude, just use what your camera suggest with some common sense and the results should be good.

once you have more practice, you can try to get gutsy and go meterless sunny 16

[OregonJim]

*Learn the zone system? Don't learn the zone system?
*Expose for shadows and develop for highlights? Or, expose for highlights and develop for shadows? (Developing part won't apply to me since I'll be sending it out)
*Light meter everything? Forget light metering!

Since you won't be doing your own processing, I wouldn't worry about the Zone System for now. Meter normally but expose for the shadows, get a yellow or yellow+green filter, maybe a red to manipulate contrast. Have fun.

[soundview]

Great tips. Will try and post soon!

[lithos]

Lithos' Most Valued BW Maxims:

* Ansel Adams is dead.

* Tri-X, Tri-X, and, failing that, Tri-X (or Fuji Neopan 400.)

If Ansel Bleedin' Adams can develop an anal-retentive system for taking a photograph, why can't you?

Truth is, Ansel Adams was an old-school photog. The Zone System works best with a few caveats:

* You're doing you're own developing.

* You're willing to spend a hundred or so bucks testing (read: "wasting") various films, at various EIs, in various developers (at various dilutions), for various times..."Kodak Tri-X @ 400 in D76 straight, devved for 7 minutes at 20 degrees...Kodak Tri-X @ 320, D76 straight, 7 minutes, 20 degrees...Kodak Tri-X @ 200, D76 1:1, 8 minutes, 20 degrees...Kodak Tri-X @400, D76 straight, 7.5 minutes, 20 degrees..." At this point, you haven't even started taking any real photos.

* You're using a view camera, with sheet film. If you use roll film, of any stripe, you're gonna have to make sure you expose every single shot on it the same way, otherwise you'll end up with photos that aren't good because some arbitrary rules made up 68 years ago.

* As mentioned above, it's a form of artistic Lysenkoism. It's making something that fits to a set of rules, laws, a photographic ideology. Do you like the shot? Yes? Then shag it, what's Anal Adams gonna do about it? Come back as a zombie and eat your brain?

* I did try reading up on the Zone System. One, it made my head spin, as I'm not good at maths, or logical thought, or fitting in with a system of rules...I know this, because I've had a crack at HTML coding, something that wouldn't gel with me no matter how much mental pectin I added (sorry for the jam-making metaphors.) Nerds are good at keeping a bunch of rules in their head and working with them; I'm not a nerd.

* As a result of my brief foray into the Zone, I then spent about the next twenty rolls of film I shot wondering things like "Crap, is that shadow on Zone II? Should it be on I? That face looks a little dark..." etc, etc, for photos that I otherwise loved. I pushed my film a lot, which didn't help. Your only judge should be your eyes. Nothing else. Not some dead Kal-eye-for-nee-an.

There's a story about a compatriot of Arbitrary Adams, a man by the name of Wynn Bullock. Adams nagged and begged and cajoled Bullock into getting a light meter and a densitometer, so that this errant sheep of a photographer would better be drawn in the flock of the Holy Church of the Zone System, and all would be right once again with the world of photography.

So, one night, Bullock's wife hears the door to Wynn's basement darkroom fly open, and the crash and clang of something being thrown into the garbage can. "To hell with the damn testing," Wynn yells, "I'm going out and making some pictures!"

Wynn stormed off with his camera gear, and his wife retrieved the meter and densitometer and gave them to Adams.

So, in short, get out there. Take some photos, shoot some frames, and to hell with the Zone.

Some photos'll be good, some'll be bad, but don't think that there's anyone, at any skill level, who doesn't have the same thing happen. Except maybe Ken Rockwell, but he's special.

[ajuett]

LOL! I needed that.

It's the same with any given martial arts, if one style is all you know then your opponent will have you. Allow random movement and you will be unique and unpredictable. So buy the color film and convert it to b&w in the computer, just don't tell anyone what film you used! ;-)

[lithos]

It might read funny, 'cause I've written that way.

But, yes, to modify your martial arts analogy, you could win fights with it, but you're gonna be amazed if your opponent pulls out a knife halfway through. Thinking "But that's against the rules!" won't save your arse from a stabbing.

About the only people who care if you took a picture using the ZS are other ZS afficionados.

And, yes, probably a lot of the stuff I do ends up looking like it was made with the Zone System. Fair enough. But the difference is that with most of it, I didn't spend ten minutes shagging around with deciding whether that shadow's gonna be where some dead geezer would want it, or face is gonna be where, again, that dead geezer would want it.

Of course, you can retroactively apply most theories to anything, when you're only looking at the outcome. It's like saying Sydney Harbour was purpose-built for being a harbour. It wasn't, but it turned out is was pretty good for harbouring ships and the like (can't say I approve of what's sprung up around it, but I digress.)

Truth is, I do adhere to the basic tenets of the Zone System, which are, essentially, "Keep dark things dark, and light things light." Every photographer does that. That's the whole basis of photography.

But, the point is, I didn't set out to do that. I enjoy the differences between different films - a skin tone on HP5 is gonna be darker than the same skintone rendered on Fuji Neopan 400. Vive la difference!

And yes, I do love spot metering, but not because you can use it to accurately measure everything in the damn scene, then get out the slide rule (it's a 1940's era system we're talking about, remember) and figure out how long to expose for. I don't have a lot of the time, with my subjects. Adams was a landscape photographer. Mountains and trees tend not to move too much. A heavy metal guitarist onstage tends to move a lot. I just stick the spot meter on something I want to be nicely exposed, and damn the rest:



All I know is what films I like - from knowing what they look like, and that's about it.

[Ratmagiclady]

I would say, that at some point, the Zone System would be useful to read, in order to learn some things about exposure, just to have some of the theory and become aware of certain things. It's not a place you need to start, though.

I think it was pretty influential for me: my own ways are sort of a much-streamlined and de-numbered version one could say. (Landscape and the like really isn't my type of work, and too much calculating has a way of creating the possibility of errors.

Anyway, there's little need to start out with it. If it appeals to you, then, there you go. But, start with basics.

[stevebrot]

I would say, that at some point, the Zone System would be useful to read, in order to learn some things about exposure, just to have some of the theory and become aware of certain things. It's not a place you need to start, though.

I think it was pretty influential for me: my own ways are sort of a much-streamlined and de-numbered version one could say. (Landscape and the like really isn't my type of work, and too much calculating has a way of creating the possibility of errors.

Anyway, there's little need to start out with it. If it appeals to you, then, there you go. But, start with basics.

What she said...

Steve

[stevebrot]

... a man by the name of Wynn Bullock. Adams nagged and begged and cajoled Bullock into getting a light meter and a densitometer, so that this errant sheep of a photographer would better be drawn in the flock of the Holy Church of the Zone System, and all would be right once again with the world of photography.

So, one night, Bullock's wife hears the door to Wynn's basement darkroom fly open, and the crash and clang of something being thrown into the garbage can. "To hell with the damn testing," Wynn yells, "I'm going out and making some pictures!"

Wynn stormed off with his camera gear, and his wife retrieved the meter and densitometer and gave them to Adams...

Ha! Ha! Ha!

I have read versions of this story before and am familiar with Wynn Bullock. The man was a genius and a friend/neighbor of both Edward Weston and Ansel Adams. He was an extremely skilled photographer and also very skilled in the darkroom. I still remember vividly the first time I saw one of his pictures. I don't know what exposure system he used, but I can say for sure that he exercised fine control over the medium and produced photos with well-crafted texture and impact. You can Goggle Wynn Bullock for a good selection of links and examples of his excellent work.

Steve

P.S. There is an apocryphal story regarding Edward Weston (as in Weston light meter and famous pepper pics) and light metering. His technique is reputed to have been to spend several minutes wandering around the subject taking readings here and there, both incident and reflected, only to walk back to the camera, scratch his head, make a few adjustments and do one exposure. Yes, only one...did he use the Zone System? Or did he just have a good understanding of what the meter was reading and what he could expect from his film?

[kevinschoenmakers]

expose for the shadows, the film has plenty of dynamic range to retain highlights

Sorry if this sounds ignorant, but with BW film it's best to go with whatever settings the lightmeter says are right for the dark parts of a particular scene? Is that what you're saying?

[stevebrot]

Sorry if this sounds ignorant, but with BW film it's best to go with whatever settings the lightmeter says are right for the dark parts of a particular scene? Is that what you're saying?

Not exactly...

The light meter will provide settings that will result in 18% gray.

-- point it at snow...18% gray

-- point it at coal...18% gray

for your final photos, the pile of snow looks like a pile of coal. The same is true if you base your exposure on a base reading from the shadows. What you would do is to get a meter reading from the shadows and add -2/-3 stops negative exposure compensation depending on what you want the shadows to look like.

The idea is to meter such that there is adequate exposure to retain some detail and texture in the shadows. You can compensate somewhat with development and printing technique to avoid blowing out the highlights, but ultimately, what you don't capture in the shadows simply is not there.

Steve

(Managed to say all that without mentioning the "Z*** S*****"... )

[k100d]

this is what i do and may/may not be any real photo technique. it all depends on what in the scene you would like to highlight. if you feel that the dark thing is more important, than meter the dark thing and hope that you can retain the highlights. if you feel like the bright thing is important, meter the bright thing and hope you can retain the shadows.

the best way is to experiment, use your DSLR on Manual Mode and in Custom Functions set AE-L button on M exposure to Tv Shift (i.e. aperture priority) and use the Spot Meter. Set your Aperture, then in a M mode, press the AE-L button in a dark scene and then a bright scene and see what the differences are in the shutter speed. then pick something in between that works best.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk100d/page9.asp

[OregonJim]

I would say, that at some point, the Zone System would be useful to read, in order to learn some things about exposure, just to have some of the theory and become aware of certain things. It's not a place you need to start, though.

I think it was pretty influential for me: my own ways are sort of a much-streamlined and de-numbered version one could say. (Landscape and the like really isn't my type of work, and too much calculating has a way of creating the possibility of errors.

Anyway, there's little need to start out with it. If it appeals to you, then, there you go. But, start with basics.

Yes, indeed. There is a lot to be learned through the Zone System, even if you don't end up practicing it, or, more likely, modifying it to suit your needs. Nobody ever claimed you had to go "by the book" - but it's a good reference point.

In any case, as Ratmagiclady said, it's not a place you need to start.

[jgredline]

expose for the shadows, the film has plenty of dynamic range to retain highlights
because of the wide exposure lattitude, just use what your camera suggest with some common sense and the results should be good.

once you have more practice, you can try to get gutsy and go meterless sunny 16

This works well for me. Infact the sunny 16 rule works very well as well. The dynamic range of film is fabulous, much more than digital..''imo''