# Zone System  - Contemporary Usage



## flyinglentris (Dec 15, 2017)

A bit of a survey here ...

How many members still employ the Zone System in their photography?
Are you professional?  Ameteur?  Artist?  Landscape?  Portraiture?
Do you use the Tiffen contrast lenses that replace the original Kodak Wratten #90?
Do you use the Zone System with digital cameras?
Provide any further insights, for example, using digital software, metering systems, etc.

Thanks in advance,


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 15, 2017)

flyinglentris said:


> A bit of a survey here ...
> 
> How many members still employ the Zone System in their photography?



Nope, shoot entirely digital now.



flyinglentris said:


> Are you professional?  Ameteur?  Artist?  Landscape?  Portraiture?



Retired professional: 35 years teaching college/univ. students photography. Fine art B&W printing and Zone System practice were specialties of mine. I still teach part-time -- last class of the semester meets tomorrow am.



flyinglentris said:


> Do you use the Tiffen contrast lenses that replace the original Kodak Wratten #90?
> Do you use the Zone System with digital cameras?



Of course not, the Zone System doesn't apply to digital. The foundation science upon which the Zone System is based is the disproportional density response of film to development. There is no corollary to that phenomenon in the process of exposing a digital sensor and processing the data. Remove the foundation stone that defines the Zone System and you have something else. Something else should be called something else otherwise you're liable to get confused.



flyinglentris said:


> Provide any further insights, for example, using digital software, metering systems, etc.
> 
> Thanks in advance,



You're welcome.

Joe


----------



## Derrel (Dec 15, 2017)

We covered this, thoroughly, in the other thread, the thread you just dug up. The Zone System does not apply to digitial imaging, in which simple Plus-Development, Normal Development, and Minus-Development were used to control the degree of contrast of Black and White ___Negative___ materials. Now, with digital, we are using __color positive__, in which ADDING exposure does not build density in a negative, but blows out the color information.

The Zone System does not apply to digital imaging. Seriously. It. Does. Not. Apply.

We are no longer exposing negative film! We are no longer developing blindly, in a light-tight developing tank, with crude controls, but have precise, full-daylight, computer controlled processing of our images.

If you want to do contemporary Zone System stuff, it would be best to buy some sheet film, some film holders, and a sheet film using camera, so that every exposure and the development of the two sheets of film in each film holder can be tailored to the right degree of gamma desired in the film.


----------



## jcdeboever (Dec 15, 2017)

I tried applying it in digital it doesn't work

Sent from my [device_name] using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 15, 2017)

I'm going to make a couple assumptions here without exact information and forgive me if I'm wrong. OP, the common mistake that folks make with this topic is to equate "The Zone System" with the exposure control aspect of the process: dividing up the tonal range of the scene into "zones," measuring that range of zones and determining what should be recorded from that range in the final image with some "visualization" thrown in. That's an aspect of The Zone System -- it's not The Zone System. So my assumption is that you're doing some variation of the same.

Derrel makes some really critical observations in his comments. In The Zone System once we made our exposure measurements We made a call to place the shadow detail which then determined our exposure. Hence the Zone System photographer's prayer; expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights. All of that was based on exposing and processing negative film stocks. If there's a film analogy to digital it's color positive not negative. With color positive the priority is expose for the highlights and there is no variable development option that's analogous to negative film development. In fact many people who shoot digital and embrace the discipline of creating camera JPEGs think of what they're doing as most closely related to shooting color transparency film -- you can talk to JC about that.

If you find it helpful to still divide the scene tonal range into zones and measure that variation that's fine, but if you're using a digital camera I recommend you do not then establish your exposure based on shadow detail placement. Noise in the shadows can be worked with, blown highlights can't. So right there we have a big difference in practice. If you're working with a digital camera you're much more concerned with highlight placement in exposure.

A digital sensor records data linearly, period. You can't do anything about that at all. The foundation of The Zone System is film's non-linear and disproportional recording of data that can be manipulated in development. Repeat: a digital sensor records data linearly, period. Once recorded you can manipulate that data in ways that would make old Ansel piss his pants if he saw it. Which begs a flip side question: why for heaven's sake would you want to limit what you can do with digital to the more limited capabilities that we struggled with using The Zone System?

Joe

P.S. 12-16 Back from class today and I just couldn't help adding a little irreverence to the end of this post. The devil made me do it.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 16, 2017)

^^^^ That photo! OMG! LMAO at that!


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 16, 2017)

Derrel said:


> ^^^^ That photo! OMG! LMAO at that!



Thanks, absolutely found it like that -- not staged in any way.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 16, 2017)

If you're referring to Ansel Adams' Zone System then yes I still use it to meter a precise exposure in both digital and film.  How I meter in digital is different than how I meter in film, but the Zone System can be used as a foundation for either.


----------



## AlanKlein (Dec 17, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> If you're referring to Ansel Adams' Zone System then yes I still use it to meter a precise exposure in both digital and film.  How I meter in digital is different than how I meter in film, but the Zone System can be used as a foundation for either.


How do you use the Zone system in digital?


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2017)

AlanKlein said:


> Vtec44 said:
> 
> 
> > If you're referring to Ansel Adams' Zone System then yes I still use it to meter a precise exposure in both digital and film.  How I meter in digital is different than how I meter in film, but the Zone System can be used as a foundation for either.
> ...



I'd be interested in hearing details and procedures on how one arrives at the Exposure Index that one rates one's _digital Black & White negative film_ at, to do one's shadow-tone light metering using one's hand-held reflected light meter. And also, about what percentage of normal film development times one uses to arrive at a suitable film-development time to get those perfectly dark-but-yet-detail-revealing Zone I and Zone II Black & White negative zones in the final darkroom silver-gelatin print. Oh, wait...the digital camera shooter does not shoot Black & White negatives, and does not develop negative film in liquid chemical solutions with controlled strength, controlled temperature regulation, and controlled chemical agitation, and does not control film gamma (degree of contrast of the final negative) to make a darkroom silver gelatin system enlargement (a projection print or contact print).

We're not projecting light through silver-based negatives to make prints based on negative data [black negative areas turn white!], but are working in a positive system, more like color transparency film. And yet, NOT really all that much like how transparency film is developed to one, final "correct" development degree.

Careful light metering using a color-positive digital camera is not using the Zone System. Electronic images that are not contrast-regulated by the developing solution's strength, its time, its temperature,and  the worker's development agitation routine are not made using Zone System methods. Again, careful and consistent light metering and exposure determination is not using the Zone System.

Perhaps it's time for some type of new description of how skilled workers perform light metering and exposure setting routines for their digital exposures? In the 1980's, we referred to this as "pegging the highlights", which is using the light meter to determine the brightest tones we wanted to look bright, but which we did not want to "blow out" through over-exposure. With a Nikon and 12mm scribed viewfinder circle and Nikon's traditional 60-percent/40-percent metering, this would involve swinging the metering circle up to the sun or light source, and placing that just outside the 12mm scribed circle, then metering, then setting that exposure or closing down the lens diaphragm to anywhere from 1/4 to 3/4 of an EV value, OR alternately, using an incident light meter (you know the one one's with the white frosted hemispherical dome) and setting that meter's suggested reading (with some wiggle room), in order to "peg the highlights". That however, was not Zone System either, because we were metering highlights, we were not regulating film development, and we were not controlling the film gamma (degree of contrast) through development.

In digital imaging, there is an entire list of things that Minor White and Ansel Adams never saw in their lifetimes. Thinking that we are using their film- and chemical-based  and time-based and agitation-based 1940's-era working methods with twenty-first century digital cameras is an erroneous understanding of what the Zone System truly was and is. Oh well, I've said my piece about this for the last time (in this thread at least). I think I shall retire to the sitting room and listen to some phonograph recordings on the Victrola while my beloved prepares a roasted chicken supper from the chicken we raised and butchered yesterday. We have also just recently taken delivery of a parcel containing a bottle of fine French wine that we ordered by postal mail and which recently (a month ago) arrived across the Atlantic by way of ship's cargo for the princely sum of $2.19 for the wine and trans-Atlantic shipment. Oh, what a fine supper we shall enjoy!


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 17, 2017)

AlanKlein said:


> How do you use the Zone system in digital?



I use it for metering and I keep it really simple.  You judge a scene, pick a subject that you want to use for metering, put that subject into the zone that you think it should be in to get a neutral exposure, then either over expose or under expose.  For color negatives, I generally pick the darker part of the scene (typically Zone 2) then over expose about 1 stop to get the tone I want.  For digital, I try to pick a neutral part of the scene (typically something in Zone 5).


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> AlanKlein said:
> 
> 
> > How do you use the Zone system in digital?
> ...



That's not using The Zone System. An essential part of using The Zone System is the darkroom process manipulations that make up the foundational science upon which The Zone System is based. You're not applying the darkroom practice. Even the language you use belies any use of The Zone System. A Zone System photographer for example would never say they meter a specific tone in a scene and then "over expose about 1 stop" -- that's antithetical to Zone System thinking. And for heaven's sake you're shooting color film! Color film will not tolerate the processing manipulations that make The Zone System work in B&W.

Thinking in terms of "tonal zones" while metering is not using The Zone System. Derrel said it above, "Again, careful and consistent light metering and exposure determination is not using the Zone System."

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> That's not using The Zone System. An essential part of using The Zone System is the darkroom process manipulations that make up the foundational science upon which The Zone System is based. You're not applying the darkroom practice. Even the language you use belies any use of The Zone System. A Zone System photographer for example would never say they meter a specific tone in a scene and then "over expose about 1 stop" -- that's antithetical to Zone System thinking. And for heaven's sake you're shooting color film! Color film will not tolerate the processing manipulations that make The Zone System work in B&W.
> 
> Thinking in terms of "tonal zones" while metering is not using The Zone System. Derrel said it above, "Again, careful and consistent light metering and exposure determination is not using the Zone System."
> 
> Joe



There are multiple parts of the Zone System, exposure and meting is just a part of it as is development.  I'm using the Zone System for exposure, others use it for development in the darkroom.  It's not a mystery like some people are trying to make it.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > That's not using The Zone System. An essential part of using The Zone System is the darkroom process manipulations that make up the foundational science upon which The Zone System is based. You're not applying the darkroom practice. Even the language you use belies any use of The Zone System. A Zone System photographer for example would never say they meter a specific tone in a scene and then "over expose about 1 stop" -- that's antithetical to Zone System thinking. And for heaven's sake you're shooting color film! Color film will not tolerate the processing manipulations that make The Zone System work in B&W.
> ...



It certainly is not a mystery, don't see that anyone is trying to make it a mystery. It is in fact extremely well documented. Best place to start is at the source:






You'll find in there that it is not a metering method that can be separated from the processing method. One informs the other and they are inseparable. Metering decisions using The Zone System can only be made in conjunction with processing decisions and vice versa. The whole point of The Zone System is to select an appropriate film processing manipulation based on the metering calculations and then follow through with the indicated print processing manipulation. They work together as a unified whole process.

There is no Zone System for exposure and there never has been. (There is also no Zone System exclusively for darkroom development -- never has been).

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Zone System was originally developed for the darkroom but can be adapted for exposure and digital.  I may not use it in the way it was originally developed for but I reference in my metering method.   It’s pretty simple and straight forward.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Zone System was originally developed for the darkroom but can be adapted for exposure and digital.



No, it was not originally developed for the darkroom. It was originally developed for use with cameras (using B&W film to create B&W prints) in variable contrast available light conditions, as a means to adjust the overall film/print response to better match the lighting contrast of the scene. The foundation science that's it's based upon is the disproportional density response of film to development.

You're sort of talking nonsense here: how is "exposure" different from "digital"?

To suggest that The Zone System can be adapted only to exposure is rather foolish. The entire point of the exposure measurement component of The Zone System is to inform the selection of the matching film development time. Take away step two and why the bleep are you screwing around with step one -- to what end? All you're potentially doing is measuring scene contrast to inform an exposure decision: that's not an adaptation of The Zone System.



Vtec44 said:


> I may not use it in the way it was originally developed



That's for sure.

Joe



Vtec44 said:


> for but I reference in my metering method.   It’s pretty simple and straight forward.


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> To suggest that The Zone System can be adapted only to exposure is rather foolish.



Who the hell said it was only for exposure?  LOL




> All you're potentially doing is measuring scene contrast to inform an exposure decision: that's not an adaptation of The Zone System.



Who to said that it is not?  You may not think so, but I do.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > To suggest that The Zone System can be adapted only to exposure is rather foolish.
> ...



A bologna sandwich on rye bread is gourmet cooking too.

Careful light metering using a color-positive digital camera is not using the Zone System. Electronic images that are not contrast-regulated by the developing solution's strength, its time, its temperature,and the worker's development agitation routine are not made using Zone System methods. Again, careful and consistent light metering and exposure determination is not using the Zone System.

One more time, for clarity, with bold face type for emphasis on a very simple, basic truth: *careful and consistent light metering and exposure determination is not using the Zone System*. Just exactly as making a bologna sandwich on rye bread is ___NOT____ gourmet cooking....it's not gourmet, annnnnnd it is not even cooking.

I consider _this_ book to be "the source"....I've had my copy since 1985 or so...https://www.amazon.com/New-Zone-Sys...1513647500&sr=8-3&keywords=zone+system+manual


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > To suggest that The Zone System can be adapted only to exposure is rather foolish.
> ...



You did. LOL

Joe



Vtec44 said:


> There are multiple parts of the Zone System, exposure and meting is just a part of it as is development. *I'm using the Zone System for exposure,* others use it for development in the darkroom. It's not a mystery like some people are trying to make it.


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> You did. LOL
> 
> Joe



"I use it only for exposure "is totally different than "the Zone System can ONLY be adapted for exposure".   English is one of the 3 languages that I speak and I thought I'm bad at it LOL  And you're typically pretty darn good at parroting information LOL


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > You did. LOL
> ...



You are having a language problem in this case. Please note that your substitution of my use of the preposition "to" with the preposition "for" completely changes the meaning of the word "only" in my sentence. I'll assume your weakness with English is responsible and forgive that. Otherwise that preposition switch on your part would be a low down attempt to change what I said. I'll also assume your misunderstanding of The Zone System derives from a similar source.

Joe


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Vtec44 said:
> 
> 
> > Ysarex said:
> ...



Good book.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> You are having a language problem in this case. Please note that your substitution of my use of the preposition "to" with the preposition "for" completely changes the meaning of the word "only" in my sentence. I'll assume your weakness with English is responsible and forgive that. Otherwise that preposition switch on your part would be a low down attempt to change what I said. I'll also assume your misunderstanding of The Zone System derives from a similar source.
> 
> Joe



Nice try!!! LOL



> To suggest that The Zone System can be adapted only to exposure is rather foolish.



Let me simplify it further for you LOL .   I NEVER SUGGEST that The Zone System can be adapted ONLY to exposure.  I TELL people I use it for exposure but other people use it for different things.  Yes, you can go ahead and parrot that too. 

And to make it even clearer if it hasn't been, no online self proclaim experts can tell me what it is and what it is not, or how to call and not to call something.  *I* will call it as I see fit. 

Edit:  I take it back, technically online self proclaim experts can tell me whatever the want LOL  It doesn't mean I give a rat ass


----------



## Derrel (Dec 18, 2017)

Taking a light meter reading and then over-exposing from what the meter indicates...that is _not_ using "the Zone System". That is basic camera work, and is simply something that has been known about for decades.

The Zone System is well-documented, was based on film, and involved the developing of film, to create a black & white negative.

Taking meter readings and then under- or over-exposing from the readings is, quite simply, NOT using "the Zone System".

If the history and the language of photography is to have any meaning whatsoever, we need to show some respect to the language, and the methods, of the field. Using real, defined, well-understood words in the wrong way does nobody any favors.

Well...back to the world in which a bologna sandwich is gourmet cooking. Right?


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Taking a light meter reading and then over-exposing from what the meter indicates...that is _not_ using "the Zone System". That is basic camera work, and is simply something that has been known about for decades.



Identify what zone the object is in and put that object in that zone to get a precise exposure without having to visually inspect your LCD screen.  Yep the method has been known for decades, but you still need to have an understanding of part of the Zone System to use it.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > You are having a language problem in this case. Please note that your substitution of my use of the preposition "to" with the preposition "for" completely changes the meaning of the word "only" in my sentence. I'll assume your weakness with English is responsible and forgive that. Otherwise that preposition switch on your part would be a low down attempt to change what I said. I'll also assume your misunderstanding of The Zone System derives from a similar source.
> ...



You're still having a language problem. When you tell people you use it for exposure but other people use it for different things, you're saying that exposure is the only thing you use it for. You don't use it for other things, just exposure. That's the meaning of the word only in my sentence. You're misunderstanding what I said. Let me say it again more clearly. Trying to Adapt The Zone System for use in exposure determination without applying the processing component of the system that informs exposure choice is rather foolish.

Joe


----------



## Derrel (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Taking a light meter reading and then over-exposing from what the meter indicates...that is _not_ using "the Zone System". That is basic camera work, and is simply something that has been known about for decades.
> ...



Nope. Sorry. I knew about over-exposing to make white things bright wayyyyyyy before I learned how to use the Zone System. I knew about under-exposing to make black cats and coal lumps black, over a decade before I ever read The System Manual.

By the way, I'm having gourmet bologna sandwiches this weekend...gonna make 'em on pumpernickle bread!


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Nice try!!! LOL



And by the way, I'm being patient with your language weakness, you should be too.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> You're still having a language problem. When you tell people you use it for exposure but other people use it for different things, you're saying that exposure is the only thing you use it for. You don't use it for other things, just exposure. That's the meaning of the word only in my sentence. You're misunderstanding what I said. Let me say it again more clearly. Trying to Adapt The Zone System for use in exposure determination without applying the processing component of the system that informs exposure choice is rather foolish.
> 
> Joe



YAWN.  

I tell people I use it for exposure, no where that I said exposure is the only thing I use it for.  Assumption is the mother of all screw ups LOL


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > You're still having a language problem. When you tell people you use it for exposure but other people use it for different things, you're saying that exposure is the only thing you use it for. You don't use it for other things, just exposure. That's the meaning of the word only in my sentence. You're misunderstanding what I said. Let me say it again more clearly. Trying to Adapt The Zone System for use in exposure determination without applying the processing component of the system that informs exposure choice is rather foolish.
> ...



Oh! Then please continue to answer Alan Klein's question and explain. Looking forward to hearing what you do with color film processing.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Nope. Sorry. I knew about over-exposing to make white things bright wayyyyyyy before I learned how to use the Zone System. I knew about under-exposing to make black cats and coal lumps black, over a decade before I ever read The System Manual.



Awesome!!  I learned that those bars and numbers in the camera's view finder can be used with zones in the Zone System also, with about Zone 5 right in the middle!   It CHANGED my life!   No I'm not even joking.


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> Oh! Then please continue to answer Alan Klein's question and explain. Looking forward to hearing what you do with color film processing.
> 
> Joe



Color film process and Zone System?  You crazy!  You need to stop assuming!!


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > Oh! Then please continue to answer Alan Klein's question and explain. Looking forward to hearing what you do with color film processing.
> ...



You said you use The Zone System with color film and you just suggested that you use The Zone System for more than just exposure.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> You said you use The Zone System with color film and you just suggested that you use The Zone System for more than just exposure.
> 
> Joe



Dang homie let me simplify it for you again and you can go back to verify LOL   I use the Zone System to meter in both digital and negative films (we're still debating if it's proper for me to say I use the Zone System since I'm only using the zones in the system  ).  I never said I ONLY use it for metering.  I also never said I use it beyond metering for color negative films.  What if I use it beyond metering but just not for color negative films????


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > You said you use The Zone System with color film and you just suggested that you use The Zone System for more than just exposure.
> ...



Then I'm waiting for your explanation of how you use it beyond metering but not for color negative film.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> Then I'm waiting for your explanation of how you use it beyond metering but not for color negative film.
> 
> Joe



I don't owe anyone, or need to explain to anyone, anything beyond what I want to explain.  People just need to know that I take pretty pictures.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > Then I'm waiting for your explanation of how you use it beyond metering but not for color negative film.
> ...



OK. In court that's called paying the fine as long as you don't have to admit to anything  -- wink, wink we all understand.



Vtec44 said:


> People just need to know that I take pretty pictures.



Yes, you do.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 18, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> OK. In court that's called paying the fine as long as you don't have to admit to anything -- wink, wink we all understand.



Nah, it's more or less withholding information.  Some people prefer not to share when they have it figured out?  Not to say that I have it figured out. LOL    It has been fun, but I got to go back to editing.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 18, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > OK. In court that's called paying the fine as long as you don't have to admit to anything -- wink, wink we all understand.
> ...



Oh OK, wink, wink, I understand.

Joe



Vtec44 said:


> Some people prefer not to share when they have it figured out?  Not to say that I have it figured out. LOL    It has been fun, but I got to go back to editing.


----------



## webestang64 (Dec 19, 2017)

I just had to know............


How to Use the Zone System to Learn about Metering and Exposure Compensation

Understanding & Using Ansel Adam's Zone System

The Zone System and Light Meters in Digital Photography (Podcast 503) • Martin Bailey Photography

Zone System for Landscape Photography - Outdoor Photographer


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 19, 2017)

webestang64 said:


> I just had to know............
> 
> 
> How to Use the Zone System to Learn about Metering and Exposure Compensation
> ...



Yeah, I've seen them all over the years. Look hard enough and you should be able to find a book or video on how to use The Zone System to improve your sex life. It did spawn something of a cult after all.

Love the Martin Bailey one: About 1/2 way through he admits he doesn't use The Zone System for his digital exposures. "If, like me, you use a technique called ETTR or Expose To The Right, this means that you set your exposure so that your highlights are almost or even just touching the right side of the histogram, and then let the mid-tones and shadows fall where they will."

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 19, 2017)

Here's another topic to debate about.  I expose slightly to the left with digital, and to the right with film.   OMG!!!


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 19, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Here's another topic to debate about.  I expose slightly to the left with digital, and to the right with film.   OMG!!!



Couldn't care less, as long as you don't claim you're following The Zone System or something else that would be presenting faulty info.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 19, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> Couldn't care less, as long as you don't claim you're following The Zone System or something else that would be presenting faulty info.
> 
> Joe



I use the Zone System for quick precise exposure and couldn't careless about the opinions of self proclaim online experts .


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 19, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > Couldn't care less, as long as you don't claim you're following The Zone System or something else that would be presenting faulty info.
> ...



I know you just can't explain it; where's that section in The Zone System about exposing digital to the left?

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 19, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> I know you just can't explain it; where's that section in The Zone System about exposing digital to the left?
> 
> Joe



That's not part of the Zone System, that's just taking advantage of the shadow recovery of digital sensors.  Expose to the right works wonder for film, especially color film.  This is why I don't listen to the bull sh1t that people post on forums.  People are good at parroting information with no real world experience or actual work to show for. 

This is getting boring.... yawn...


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 19, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> I use the Zone System for quick precise exposure and couldn't careless about the opinions of self proclaim online experts .





Vtec44 said:


> People are good at parroting information with no real world experience or actual work to show for.
> 
> This is getting boring.... yawn...



And you criticized me for making assumptions. You're inability to explain or defend your claims along with your inconsistencies satisfies me just fine. Go ahead make some more assumptions.

Joe


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 19, 2017)

Ysarex said:


> And you criticized me for making assumptions.  You're inability to explain or defend your claims along with your inconsistencies satisfies me just fine. Go ahead make some more assumptions.
> 
> Joe



Aww... name calling.  CUTE!

I use the tonal scale in the Zone System to aid with precise exposure in both digital and analog, you and the rest of the self proclaim online experts can sit and pout how that's not using the Zone System all you want.  I expose digital to the left to take advantage of the shadow recovery of digital sensors.   Why do I need to explain or defend anything that I do?  LOL  If people don't get, or don't agree, with what I do and my process then keep on walking.   I shoot over 100,000 digital frames and over 5000 shots in film yearly.  I do just fine regardless of the opinions of the self proclaim online experts.  LOL

This reminds me, there was one time people on here said I'm wrong about storytelling and it's not helpful.  Then, Annie Leibovitz came out with a commercial for her master class a few weeks later brought up the storytelling aspect.  Yep, I'm definitely troll! LOL


----------



## Derrel (Dec 19, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > And you criticized me for making assumptions.  You're inability to explain or defend your claims along with your inconsistencies satisfies me just fine. Go ahead make some more assumptions.
> ...




All __you__ are doing is taking light meter readings and varying from them! And you think that is "the Zone System".

I suppose the last commercial aircraft ride you took made you "an astronaut".

And the aches and pains you cured with some aspirin made you "a medical doctor".

And you opened a can of soup, and now are, "a classically trained chef."


----------



## terri (Dec 19, 2017)

You all need to step back from this thread.   The increase in inflammatory rhetoric isn't going to get you anything but a locked thread.   The OP isn't even involved at this point. 

So cool down.   Thanks.


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 19, 2017)

Derrel said:


> All __you__ are doing is taking light meter readings and varying from them! And you think that is "the Zone System".
> 
> I suppose the last commercial aircraft ride you took made you "an astronaut".
> 
> ...




Uh I never said that's all the Zone System is.  LOL

The difference is that I'm not here to claim to be an expert on anything.  How bad my work will speak for itself LOL. I'm no astronaut, doctor, chef, or amazing photographer.  Some of the self proclaim experts on here got all butt hurt because I don't care about their opinion.  I'd respect people more if they put some of the information they parroting to actual work and show it.  It's like someone who can memorize all these recipes  but can't cook for sh1t, but keep on spewing them out as if they're some amazing chef.  They LOVE to try to correct people to make them feel like they're worth something.  I find it entertaining.


----------



## snowbear (Dec 19, 2017)

IBL


----------



## Derrel (Dec 19, 2017)

Vtec44 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > All __you__ are doing is taking light meter readings and varying from them! And you think that is "the Zone System".
> ...



It seems to me, and likely to others, that some folks around here do not understand what the words "Zone System" really refers to. Merely taking a light meter reading, and deviating from that light meter reading, does not mean that one is,  "using the Zone System".

If taking a meter reading and deviating from that meter reading were using the Zone System, then wouldn't it also be using the Zone System if one simply used the exposure compensation button, and dialed in Plus 1.0 EV, or Minus 1.3 EV?

I am not here to, as you so condescendingly put it, "_to claim to be an expert on anything_", but when I see misinformation related to photographic topics, I will speak up.
*
Once again, simply taking a light meter reading, and deviating from that light meter suggestion, is not to be construed as, "Using the Zone System*".


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 19, 2017)

Derrel said:


> but when I see misinformation related to photographic topics, I will speak up.



As will I
*
*


Derrel said:


> *Once again, simply taking a light meter reading, and deviating from that light meter suggestion, is not to be construed as, "Using the Zone System*".



Failed!  That's not the way I do it because you will need to understand the tonal chart from the zone system to take the guest work out of it and gt a precise exposure on your first shot.

But regardless, again, who are you to tell me that it is not? LOL  We may disagree on if my use of the tonal chart from the Zone System is actually using the system, or part of the system, but oh please.  What you think of what I do is irrelevant even if it's in bold letters. LOL

IBTL

Sorry @terri


----------



## limr (Dec 19, 2017)

Okay okay, I get it! You're all too cool to care what anyone thinks. The horse is dead. The thread won't have to be locked if y'all would just Let.It.Go. 

Move on. Go take some pictures or something.

Sheesh.


----------



## flyinglentris (Dec 20, 2017)

I did expect that my original post might spawn a diatribe on whether the zone system still applies at all.  Yep.

My original post did not specifically ask if it was still valid with digital:



flyinglentris said:


> A bit of a survey here ...
> 
> How many members still employ the Zone System in their photography?
> Are you professional? Ameteur? Artist? Landscape? Portraiture?
> ...



I've been watching for someone to even mention the use of histograms and that came only as a passing comment. Neither were exposure bracketing, HDR and other exposure evaluations considered.  And worse, nobody touched on the fact that there is a huge population of photogs who still shoot film.  And that's a comment I'm making here that's likely to spin off another huge diatribe.  But it is true.   You can prove that by noting the number of photography businesses that are prospering in that niche alone.  The Zone System is therefore still alive and contemporary.  Somebody out there is shooting B&W film.

Only one member actually took the survey; the rest just flailed.


----------



## limr (Dec 20, 2017)

flyinglentris said:


> I did expect that my original post might spawn a diatribe on whether the zone system still applies at all.  Yep.
> 
> My original post did not specifically ask if it was still valid with digital:
> 
> ...



Was there a reason why you didn't just go ahead and ask people about histograms or bracketing or HDR? Was this some kind of photo forum Thunderdome?


----------



## flyinglentris (Dec 20, 2017)

limr said:


> Was there a reason why you didn't just go ahead and ask people about histograms or bracketing or HDR? Was this some kind of photo forum Thunderdome



This was no Thunderdome.   I had thought about including Qs about histograms, HDR, metering, etc., but did not want to overload things.   I did include the following:



flyinglentris said:


> Provide any further insights, for example, using digital software, metering systems, et



I figure that the type of photog that still uses the zone falls into the category of photo artist or photo specialty, not photojournalist, product photographer, etc.   Though ameteur or beginner might.  I am a photo artist and a very technical one at that.   I am an analytic.   I sought to draw out those photogs who share my views and insights. 



flyinglentris said:


> Are you professional? Ameteur? Artist? Landscape? Portraiture



So far that appears to have failed.


----------



## flyinglentris (Dec 20, 2017)

I am new to this forum and have to ask:  What would you have the forum do for you, provide a stage for thumping your chest or be a place for sharing thoughts and resources.


----------



## snowbear (Dec 20, 2017)

flyinglentris said:


> I am new to this forum and have to ask:  What would you have the forum do for you, provide a stage for thumping your chest or be a place for sharing thoughts and resources.


Both happen, frequently.


----------



## limr (Dec 20, 2017)

flyinglentris said:


> I am new to this forum and have to ask:  What would you have the forum do for you, provide a stage for thumping your chest or be a place for sharing thoughts and resources.



To whom are you addressing this question?

I don't know about other forums or other users, but _this _forum should be used as a way to share thoughts or resources, to ask for or give feedback on our images, and to learn. It shouldn't be used for "chest thumping" nor should it be used to encourage chest-thumping.

Constructive discussions and disagreements are part of the forum, though posting threads that are expected to "spawn a diatribe" is perhaps _not_ the best way to get to those constructive discussions.


----------



## flyinglentris (Dec 20, 2017)

limr said:


> Constructive discussions and disagreements are part of the forum, though posting threads that are expected to "spawn a diatribe" is perhaps _not_ the best way to get to those constructive discussions.



I did not post this thread expecting to spawn a diatribe.  You asked what I expected and I said:



flyinglentris said:


> I sought to draw out those photogs who share my views and insights.



I'll go with constructive discussion and disagreement any day.  'nuff said.


----------



## limr (Dec 20, 2017)

You did not write this?



flyinglentris said:


> I did expect that my original post might spawn a diatribe on whether the zone system still applies at all.  Yep.


----------



## terri (Dec 20, 2017)

OP, you did in fact write those words, and now you seem interested in veering into a discussion defending film users.  Another dead horse to beat.

Hope you had hot buttered popcorn and enjoyed the "flailing" you apparently set out to cause.

Now that you've tipped your hand, it's not likely many members will participate in your threads.  You've also got the attention of the moderators here.

Just take care before tossing out your next bits of napalm.   Unlikely you'll enjoy the show as much as you did this one.


----------



## snowbear (Dec 20, 2017)

It's best not to piss off the mods, or toss out grenades (and lie about it) unless you want to be reading as a guest.


----------



## flyinglentris (Dec 21, 2017)

flyinglentris said:


> I did expect that my original post might spawn a diatribe on whether the zone system still applies at all. Yep.



Yes,  I said this, only because I saw that the post had not gotten the results I was after.  I wonder now what might have come of this statement had I said "I did wonder if my original post might spawn a diatribe ..."

And now I am a villain and accused of lying.

This is my last post at this forum and won't be back, even as a guest.


----------



## Dave442 (Dec 21, 2017)

The original post said "the zone system" and for me that means the system as laid out for the B&W film exposure and developing management system. Many people noted their use of parts of the zone system (Digital Zone?). I feel the Zone System is a way to convey to others they methods and methodology used to arrive at the final image. So the original question was more of "how do you arrive at your final image" and this can take quite a bit of writing to lay out the thought process and actions. 

Overall I thought the thread was useful. A number of people did note how they arrive at their exposure values and there of plenty of other threads on here that cover some of the points the OP was looking for. 

As for film shooters - even in its day the zone system was best done with sheet film. Somebody had made that comment to me back when I shot roll film and had a darkroom.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 21, 2017)

Dave442 said:


> The original post said "the zone system" and for me that means the system as laid out for the B&W film exposure and developing management system. Many people noted their use of parts of the zone system (Digital Zone?). I feel the Zone System is a way to convey to others they methods and methodology used to arrive at the final image. So the original question was more of "how do you arrive at your final image" and this can take quite a bit of writing to lay out the thought process and actions.
> 
> Overall I thought the thread was useful. A number of people did note how they arrive at their exposure values and there of plenty of other threads on here that cover some of the points the OP was looking for.
> 
> As for film shooters - even in its day the zone system was best done with sheet film. Somebody had made that comment to me back when I shot roll film and had a darkroom.



Zone System works fine with roll film; that's what I did for the most part. You just use a roll film camera that takes interchangeable backs. When you see a Hasselblad go up for sale and there's four 120 roll backs with the camera it might be because they wanted to use B&W and color at the same time but it's also likely those backs are labeled N--, N-, N, and N+. It's more difficult with 35mm because you need multiple camera bodies, but more likely the kind of folks who are into Zone System practice are also big film users.

Joe


----------

