So I've been going through the Ansel basic series and reading up on the Zone System. Forgive me as I don't have a full understanding of it yet but... I'm wondering is there anyway of making full use of the Zone System for using roll film? I'm not talking about just exposing for Zone V every time. I'm talking fully calculating and placing all zones as desired between exposure and development. Is there any way to make practical use of this with roll film without just shooting a whole roll in the same?

I think that came out clear... sorry, still all very new to me :o

There are a few books out there for this, google "zone system and roll film or 35 mm and you'll find them.
I looked into it, but never really saw the point when you have 36 or even 12 different scenes on a roll.
If I were shooting sheet film I would certainly want more control.
Just my two cents of course.
Brian

...I looked into it, but never really saw the point when you have 36 or even 12 different scenes on a roll...

That's what I was thinking. Couldn't really see any way of making full use of it without throwing off the other shots on the roll. Wasn't sure if maybe someone had some tricks/tips/wisdom on it.

With full zone system you can go to n-1, n-2, n-3, etc. With roll film, if you shoot an entire roll in one outing, where most frames are close in contrast range (not necessarily exact), it's best to just do n-1 or n+1. IOW, don't stray too far from N, and always expose for the shadows. This way the majority of your shots will look better than they would had you developed at N, and the rest won't be too far off. The difference between N and N-1 is not going to ruin a shot.

This is pretty much my strategy for 35mm. The majority of the time, I slightly underdevelop to reduce contrast, which make the negative scan better. And it's easier to add contrast than it is to remove it. If I shoot in flat lighting, I'll develop normally, but I rarely over develop.

With 120, this works even better. When you find that perfect scene, you will probably want to bracket a few exposures to make sure you place the shadows where you want them. Then you will probably want to try a few different compositions. That will eat up 12 frames pretty fast. A single good frame from a roll of 120 is a success in my book. A single excellent frame is even better.

With 120, this works even better. When you find that perfect scene, you will probably want to bracket a few exposures to make sure you place the shadows where you want them. Then you will probably want to try a few different compositions. That will eat up 12 frames pretty fast. A single good frame from a roll of 120 is a success in my book. A single excellent frame is even better.

Good point, hadn't really thought about it like that.

I have to be honest with you, I don't fully understand the whole n, n-1, n-2, etc. thing yet. I just started reading about it and right off the bat was wondering how practical it really is when you're not shooting on a frame by frame basis. Man, I have bunch of reading to do :o

I have heard of the zone system, they teach it here at a local college. Part of the photography class. I wondered did the old timers have a way of combining exposures. Like HDRs. I have read about Mick Orton sandwiching two slides together. I almost think that all of the old photographers had dark room secrets that made them who the were? There is a local photographer here in Rome that has never shot anything but film. He is in his 80's. It looks like on some of his prints he some how replaced the sky.

I’m sorry if you already know this, but I think understanding how film works on a theoretical level will help in understanding the Zone System. Hopefully someone will get something out of this.

Film is Silver Halide crystals embedded in a plastic carrier. When it's exposed to light, those crystals undergo a chemical change that I can't really explain. :D When you develop the film, the exposed Silver Halide is converted into Silver metal and the unexposed Silver Halide is unaffected. The Silver metal is what we see as black on the negative or highlights in the photo. When you Fix the film, you’re basically washing out the unexposed Silver Halide, which clears the unexposed portions of the negative. (You’re Fixer stops working when it is saturated with the unexposed Silver Halide.)

When you expose a frame in your camera, the amount of exposure varies greatly across the frame, thankfully, so we can see an image in it. In the part of the frame where you exposed the shadows, less of the Silver Halide will be converted to metal. And in the highlights, a lot of the Silver Halide was exposed and the negative will be darker and denser with Silver metal.

When you start developing the film, the shadow areas contain less of the exposed Silver Halide, so almost all of the exposed Silver Halide is converted to metal very quickly. The developer in contact with this part of the film becomes exhausted more slowly, which is why agitation has less of an effect on the shadows. In the highlights, where most (or all) of the Silver Halide was exposed, the developer becomes exhausted very quickly. It converts part of the Silver Halide to metal, becomes exhausted, you agitate, fresh developer comes in and it converts more of the Silver Halide to metal. This continues until one of three things happens: the developer becomes fully exhausted, all of the exposed Silver Halide has been converted to metal, or you stop the development.

That’s a basic explanation of how film works.

The Zone System is a way for precisely calculating how much exposure will give you the shadow detail you want (which is really nothing new), and when to stop the development so not to blow out the highlights. Often you are faced with a scene that has too much contrast, so the range from black to white needs to be compressed to fit on a print. This is done by decreasing development. Other times you may find a scene where everything is just kinda gray, and you want to darken the dark grays and brighten the light grays, to stretch the contrast range to fit on a print. This is done by increasing development.

I highly recommend that you continue to read about it and experiment with your development times and exposure techniques. It will help you get a feel for how much control you have over the contrast range of your film, so you can learn to tweak things when necessary.

Sorry this was so long. I hope it was helpful.

Paul

Thanks Paul :) I understand how film works and what happens during exposure and development. I also undrstand the basic jist of the Zone System. It's the whole exposure calculation and determining Zone assignment and calculating N and it's development variations that escape me right now. Like I said though, this is something I just started reading about. I think I might need to take a break for a day or 2 from reading actually though. My brain is jello from the past week...LOL

Thanks Paul. I would love to learn how to control the developing so I can contrast it more or make it grainy. But that can also be done in PPing as well. But I rarely adjust much more than the exposure in PPing.

Thanks Paul :) I understand how film works and what happens during exposure and development. I also undrstand the basic jist of the Zone System. It's the whole exposure calculation and determining Zone assignment and calculating N and it's development variations that escape me right now. Like I said though, this is something I just started reading about. I think I might need to take a break for a day or 2 from reading actually though. My brain is jello from the past week...LOL

I thought you might already know that stuff, but it seemed important, so I figured I'd post it for whoever else might be reading. :blush2: :D

It sounds like the part that you don't understand is the part that just requires lots of experimentation. I've experimented with the zone system, but not enough to figure out exactly what N-1 or N-2 is exactly. You'll probably find, like most of us, that the full detail the Zone System is capable of is not really necessary most of the time, and not practical for roll film...especially 35mm. Still, I think there's a lot to be learned from experimenting with it. So, go screw up some film!!! :D :thumbsup:

Thanks Paul. I would love to learn how to control the developing so I can contrast it more or make it grainy. But that can also be done in PPing as well. But I rarely adjust much more than the exposure in PPing.

It's really hard to reduce contrast in PPing but increasing contrast works better. I usually develop my negatives so they will be a little low in contrast, knowing the roll will have both high and low contrast shots. This salvages some of the high contrast shots and still allows me to increase contrast in PPing where needed. I'd like to get the negatives perfect, but with 38 exposures on one roll, you have to compromise. :)

I thought you might already know that stuff, but it seemed important, so I figured I'd post it for whoever else might be reading. :blush2: :D

I'm glad you did. It was very clearly explained and well written. For someone reading the thread now or down the road that doesn't understand how it all works, they will need to learn if they want to try making use of the Zone System.

...So, go screw up some film!!! :D :thumbsup:

Trust me, been doing PLENTY of that...LOL I'm up to about 5 rolls of 120 a week now. I really need to slow down though. I can't keep up this pace with Christmas shopping coming...LOL Just been a lot of experimenting. Different filters, experimenting with my metering, etc. I just got a new cable release and finally a good red filter in today, so I fear it's only going to get worse :o

I'm glad you did. It was very clearly explained and well written. For someone reading the thread now or down the road that doesn't understand how it all works, they will need to learn if they want to try making use of the Zone System.

Good. I hope we have people coming through here that want to learn this stuff.

Trust me, been doing PLENTY of that...LOL I'm up to about 5 rolls of 120 a week now. I really need to slow down though. I can't keep up this pace with Christmas shopping coming...LOL Just been a lot of experimenting. Different filters, experimenting with my metering, etc. I just got a new cable release and finally a good red filter in today, so I fear it's only going to get worse :o

Cool. :cool: Keep it up. :thumbsup: At the rate I'm going I'll never run out of things I should try a different way. :D

Cool. :cool: Keep it up. :thumbsup: At the rate I'm going I'll never run out of things I should try a different way. :D

Me neither. I'll just run out of film, chemicals, and money...LOL :o :rolleyes: :cryin:

While I have used the Zone system extensively and will still use it when shooting sheet film...your correct that its not really the best system for roll film. That said...I still use my Zone VI Labs modifed Soligor spot meter with the old zone system label (actually I made new labels recently...can talk you all through that if there is interest) on it as a visualization tool. Those of you shooting B&W film can find alot of use out of a simplified zone system. Using this process you can meter different areas of your scene and place those readings in the appropriate 'zone' and with my spots I can then tell where other metered areas will fall. I have been known, with the right subject, to shoot one subject on the entire 120 roll so I can extend or reduce development time to alter detail in shadow/highlights as needed.

Something another friend of mine is working with roll film centers around actually playing with developer temperature and time to affect shadow detail. Again this requires a committment of the entire roll of film. I would be hesitant to do this with 35mm...but with us shooting 120...especially at 6X7 with 10 exposures on the roll...its far less of a committment.

I'm wondering is there anyway of making full use of the Zone System for using roll film?

Absolutely. In fact, if I were to guess, I'd say when the ZS was at its height (oh, early 80s?) the majority who used it shot roll film, including 35mm.

What's cool is you don't have to use it full-fledged to benefit from its principals.

When I was shooting film, I employed a modified, simpler version of it. For b&w, if the lighting was flatter, I'd meter a grey card for a Zone V, and develop for the normal amount of time for that brightness range.

For more contrasty lighting, I'd meter for a fairly deep shadow and place it as a Zone II, then figure the brightness range, and adjust the developing time to keep the highlights in check.

Once you get used to working this way, you begin to do it without thinking.

Is there any way to make practical use of this with roll film without just shooting a whole roll in the same?

Good question. For me, I got out of the habit (bad IMO) of shooting different lighting scenes (conditions) on the same roll of film, so it's a moot point. I found a different scene, or the lighting changed significantly, I started a new roll of film. This makes processing choices much easier.

If you regularly shoot different lighting scenes on the same rolls of film, then yeah, you might have to make a choice which one you want to be the better negative, and hope the others don't come out too bad.

OTOH, some bw films have a ridiculous latitude. At some point I started shooting Ilford XP2 exclusively (mainly because I didn't have time to do my own processing anymore).

That has an exposure latitude of five stops!

At that point, you can throw the ZS out the window... :D

Thank you very much Jason and Steve :D I still have a lot more reading to do on the Zone System before I'll full grasp it and it's potential. As for practicality, after reading your posts, I guess it's not that bad being only 12 shots. I suppose if I had another scene with very different lighting, I could just compensate how I expose that image to fall in the line with the previous shot(s).

Back to reading :o

Thank you very much Jason and Steve :D I still have a lot more reading to do on the Zone System before I'll full grasp it and it's potential. As for practicality, after reading your posts, I guess it's not that bad being only 12 shots. I suppose if I had another scene with very different lighting, I could just compensate how I expose that image to fall in the line with the previous shot(s).

Back to reading :o

I just remembered something. Most MF SLR systems have interchangable film backs. If you bought into one of those systems, you could have different film backs for different development needs...N, N-1, N+1, etc. You could switch film backs when you encountered different lighting. Then you wouldn't have to compromise on anything. You already have two TLRs, so you could do a simplified version of this already.

Hmm...I knew I needed an excuse to get an R4A. :D

Paul

...You already have two TLRs, so you could do a simplified version of this already...

HAD... The Yashica is heading to Greg McCary on Monday :o

That is a very good idea though if I get a set-up with interchangeable backs :thumbsup:

I just remembered something. Most MF SLR systems have interchangable film backs. If you bought into one of those systems, you could have different film backs for different development needs...N, N-1, N+1, etc. You could switch film backs when you encountered different lighting. Then you wouldn't have to compromise on anything. You already have two TLRs, so you could do a simplified version of this already.

Hmm...I knew I needed an excuse to get an R4A. :D

Paul

Precisely the reason I STILL tote that RB67 into the field when I have an ever so light 7II available as well. ;-)

HAD... The Yashica is heading to Greg McCary on Monday :o

Doh!:p :D

Well, maybe while you're experimenting and trying to learn it, you could just take several of the cameras you have, even if some are 35mm and some are 120.

Another option is to do your own bulk loading. Not exactly convenient, but you could make a lot of short rolls.

Doh!:p :D

Well, maybe while you're experimenting and trying to learn it, you could just take several of the cameras you have, even if some are 35mm and some are 120.

Another option is to do your own bulk loading. Not exactly convenient, but you could make a lot of short rolls.

Or Rollei did make cut sheet backs. Wonder if any of those would fit the 'cords or if they were just for the 'flexes. Damn it, I had talked myself out of LF for quite some time, now I want to try a 4x5 field cam...LOL

As an interesting little update...

I was reading Examples: The Making Of 40 Photographs (http://www.amazon.com/Examples-Making-Photographs-Ansel-Adams/dp/082121750X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196824315&sr=8-1), and more specifically about his shot "Georgia O'Keefe and Orville Cox" (http://www.anseladams.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=165). The photo was taken with a Zeiss Contax and in the description he touches upon his approach to shooting roll film:

"... Obviously, with the same roll of film I tried to work with the same luminance range for all exposures. For a roll containing varied subject scales, I found by experience that if I gave generous exposures (usually 2 times "average") with prie consideration for the shadows, and developed for two-thirds the normal time, I obtained a high level of success. I would later correct the image contrast by printing on various contrast grades of paper. When one roll contained only subjects of normal or flat luminance range, I gave normal or more-than-normal development respectively."

On a side note, this is an excellent book that I highly recommend to everyone. The book discusses all facets of a photograph, from the initial visualization, to the final print.

As an interesting little update...

I was reading Examples: The Making Of 40 Photographs (http://www.amazon.com/Examples-Making-Photographs-Ansel-Adams/dp/082121750X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196824315&sr=8-1), and more specifically about his shot "Georgia O'Keefe and Orville Cox" (http://www.anseladams.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=165). The photo was taken with a Zeiss Contax and in the description he touches upon his approach to shooting roll film:



On a side note, this is an excellent book that I highly recommend to everyone. The book discusses all facets of a photograph, from the initial visualization, to the final print.

Thanks for posting this quote, Aaron. It's cool to hear that the master used basically the same approach as I do...not to say I do it anywhere near as well. :blush2: That book sounds interesting.

Paul

Paul, I just got another book in today that looks like it is going to be an excellent learning tool and is along the lines of Examples: The Making Of 40 Photographs (http://www.amazon.com/Examples-Making-Photographs-Ansel-Adams/dp/082121750X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196824315&sr=8-1). Take a look for The Fine Print by Fred Picker (http://www.amazon.com/fine-print-Fred-Picker/dp/0817405844/ref=sr_11_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1197003526&sr=11-1). In it he has a selection of varied photographs with different subjects, lighting, etc. He brakes down the exposure and developing of each shot and the how's and why's. I haven't had a chance to fully go through it yet but, looks very promising.

When I took a class on zone system in college, the one Greg was talking about, we would all shoot fom hand wound film, that came from the same canister. Each roll would only have 12 or so exposures on it. We would then shoot gray cards to determine what our true ISO was. We were shooting ISO 400 film, but some cameras the true ISO would be 800, others as high as 1600. Mine was right on 400. Then we would develop to see what gave us a maximum black and a shade just above white. We would then calculate this as being our development time. Mine was as follows. 68 degree water. I think I was using microdol, may have been t-max (it was a liquid syrupy). 9mins, 30secs agitating 10seconds for every minute. This would give me very impressive negatives with every zone accounted for as long as every zone was in the photo which generally was the case.

Probably didn't make any sense, took me forever to grasp it, but I'm glad I did.

Z

Thanks for posting Zack. Are you saying that I should fire a test roll with my Bessa R and adjust my developing time to fit my camera and what kind of lighting conditions did you test under?

Hi Z :) I wish there was a class around here I could take on it. I mean, I understand the basic concept of it but, I'm not quite grasping the full application of it :confused: Okay, it's time to finally sit down and read "The Negative" :o

I remember the developer it was HC-110 in a 1:64 dilution. If you are buying film over the counter then things can get a little tricky, but if you are hind winding your film then you have a little more precision. If it was a contrasty day then I would decrease my development by 25%, if it was a dull day then I would increase my development by 25%. You are developing for the shadows and exposing for highlights. I would usually shoot a grey card at the beginning of a roll so I knew what my zone 9 was. My zone 9 was a little darker than the white paper. My zone 1 was a little lighter than pitch black. It takes a lot of testing, but it taught me what my photo was going to look like before I ever took the photo. It also kept me from using enlarger filters, because they simply weren't needed anymore.

Z

I remember the developer it was HC-110 in a 1:64 dilution...

Coincidentally what I'm using right now :)

...You are developing for the shadows and exposing for highlights...

I thought it was the other way around, "Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" :confused:

you are right....it was late....just got done with long paper...need more sleep in my diet.

...need more sleep in my diet.

I know exactly how you feel :cryin:

I've been following this thread with Great Interest. It had never occurred to me that different cameras may expose the film diffrerently - but that's really going to be due to the optical properties of the lens, right?

I've also always wondered how accurate the shutter speeds are from one camera to another. Is 1/500th of a second on my Nikon FM really the same length of exposure as on my Mamiya? There's got to be a margin of error there...

There are a lot of variables to consider, not only optics and shutter speeds but also your film developing and even more so print developing. Individually each step may only be off a hair but, in the end all those hairs add up. I found an interesting article if you're interested:

http://www.edbuziak.workzsites.com/photography_Zone_System_2_p1.html

Tons of things matter. When I was Zone testing my camera for the first 6 weeks or so all we shot were grey cards and test charts. The meter has a lot to do with the headache. Meters on different cameras meter differently. My Maxxum 70 will meter differently than your F100, or AE-1. The trick is to find what your camera meters at. My camera metered ISO 400 on Tri-x, and Neopan 400. Other students cameras would meter at 320, some 200, others as high as 800. Of course we were looking for optimal print value or a print with all zones incorporated.

Quite interesting really, something I would reccommend for everyone.

Z

While I can't do full testing as I don't have the ability to make prints as of yet, I have a couple bricks of Acros on the way and some gray cards. Going to try and get my meter dialed in with my Rolleicord. I know the speeds have got to be a tad off. Will be interesting to see how the speed testing turns out.

Most of the variation from camera to camera is in the meter. Shutter speeds can be off, but that usually just means the camera needs a good CLA. This is why it's helpful to use a hand held spot meter if you're doing zone system. You can use the same meter with each camera and get the same results. I don't think there will be significant variation in the f-stops from one lens to another. That's not something that will go out of calibration unless the lens has serious problems, like gummed up aperture blades.

Remember that large format lenses have the shutter built-in. From an exposure stand point, each lens is a different camera.

buy a bulk loader and make some cannisters of 12 exposure, this might make using the zone system more economically viable

I agree with skyman. When I was doing testing we only shot on 10-12 frame rolls of tri-x, if not then you are going to have a lot of wasted film