# Film beginner's questions



## ryunin (Jan 17, 2010)

Hi everyone, I am completely new here and would like to ask some questions about film photography and photograpy in general. I am very confused about several things, although I have been looking for replies and answers to my questions all over the world, I mean books, forums, articles. 

After one year of shooting digital I could not resist to try film. Then I also read  about all those advantages and disadvantages of film, I don't want to discuss that here, I think that's solved for me and I still want to shoot digital in situations I cannot handle with film. 

I had questions about film and entered one special darkroom forum and after a few posts I was more or less kicked out. My questions provoked the members and some even thought I was making fun of them. It's difficult for me to ask "proper" questions. So here I hope I find someone patient to help me in my confusion. 

I'd like to organize my priorities when learning to become a decent film photographer. I have read several books about photography and how to shoot this and that and at least with digital, using RAW I think I can handle most common exposure situations and set my digital camera properly. Of course, exposure in film is to me, a different story.  I think I have covered the very basic about photography in general. Now I don't know what the next step would be and here I feel I am at an intersection. If you look at my website, you will better understand what stage I have reached and maybe suggest how to proceed further on. But I'd like to ask some very naive and maybe silly questions, I just can't answer them myself. Thank you very much.


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 17, 2010)

As far as exposure goes, film and digital should be more or less the same.  The same techniques and rules apply.  What exactly are you having trouble with?



ryunin said:


> If you look at my website, you will better understand what stage I have reached and maybe suggest how to proceed further on.



You did not provide a link to your website...


----------



## ryunin (Jan 17, 2010)

O|||||||O said:


> As far as exposure goes, film and digital should be more or less the same.  The same techniques and rules apply.  What exactly are you having trouble with?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The link is Roman Valek Photography

I filled it in my profile, but probably is not  shown publicly. 


I understand the rules for exposures are about the same for film and digital. When shooting digital, I use RAW and hence I can easily check if I under or overexpose. I usually underexpose a bit and work with that in Camera Raw and it works out fine. In most situation such procedure is simple, in complicated light situations I use spot metering, when for example shooting against the light or when the subject I want to define in details must not be overexposed. 

I tried the same technique with film. I rely on the meter of F75 and outdoors it works fine in 95 % cases. Indoors usually not. There is no histogram check so obviously, this is a guess game. I found out asking photographers that my problem is that I have no control over developing the negative, which, in case of difficult light conditions, has to be developed very specifically to achieve the desired results. The conclusion for me was - I have to develop myself to have control over the final negative look or to have the right exposure on it. This far I understand.     

But here is where my confusion begins: 

When asking about problems with indoor exposure and developing negatives in a forum, I got tons of advice such as:

Why are you shooting film at all? Go back to digital, you just waste precious films. You don't deserve them.

Don't develop negatives, learn the laws of exposure first, buy a hand held light meter and walk around the world with it, learn what it tells you. 

Don't mess up with light meters, just use matrix, it is reliable. 

Go and develop films yourself, it is cheap and easy. 

To me, they sound like very confusing answers going to all directions and pretty contradicting one another. 

I understand that different photographers will advise different things, but can we find some kind of sensible attitude that would make sense for me, as a semi-beginner whose main concern is to produce a nice photography hung on the wall that could please both a lay person and a pro? I am not sure how detailed the technical education of a photographer should be. 

Do all serious photographers need to learn all about exposure laws to make quality photos or can we rely on things like matrix metering? Should we all know about Zone System or can we rely on curves in photoshop, that according to one book I read, far exceeds the options Zone System offers? Should we learn to use manual rather than AUTO when we choose exposure and leave the camera decide the shutter speed?  

I am willing to learn any way, any direction, if it makes some sense to me. 
I have a hard time accepting things that make no sense, although sometimes it is necessary to trust a teacher, even if we don't understand.

One thing I am sure. I am not interested in making perfectly realistic Velvia color landscape photography / I adore the photographers who can do that and am sure my skills are almost nothing compared to those guys. I am into rather harsh looking, grainy black and white photographs of people, streets and landscapes. If I want to make a smooth photo of a landscape or a person, I will choose digital for now, as I see no reason to use films for that kind of photography - yet.


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 17, 2010)

Wow, I hope that wasn't here.

To answer a few of your questions:

Yes, the Zone system is still good to know, and you should learn it.  Even if you only shoot digital, you need to know this stuff.

The meter in your camera wants to put everything in Zone V.  If the object you are metering really is in zone V, all is good and you don't have to do anything.  BUT - If it's in Zone II - a rock face in shadow, for example - your meter will be wrong.  You will have to underexpose by 3 stops to get that shadow where it belongs.

Curves can help - but they help a lot more when you start off close to where you want to be.

"Just use matrix"...  That just sounds like the guy who said that didn't want to take the 5 minutes it would have taken to explain this stuff to you.

Matrix is good if the scene is relatively evenly lit.  If you have bright highlights and dark shadows though...  Your meter will be fooled.  Spot metering is useful here.

Keep in mind that your camera puts everything in Zone V.  When you meter the shadow, what does it tell you?  When you meter the highlight, what does it tell you?  This is the dynamic range of the scene, and in most cases you'll probably want to expose somewhere between those extremes.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 17, 2010)

The thing with film is that you have four tools to manipulate ...

Exposure of the film
Development of the film (if possible)
... if you are shooting print film:
Exposure of the print
Development of the print

With digital you have the exposure of the sensor
Manipulation of the digital file
Digital offers a level of control that is really not possible with film (or is too complex).

If you are shooting Colour or E-6 slide film ... you do not have much control over the printing or development of the film unless you are that adventurous to do your own developing, which many do not.
It is critical to get the exposure right during shooting.

B+W film is another story. I was only satisfied with my B+W photography when I developed my own film and built a darkroom to print.

I think Film shooters are overly critical of Digital shooters.
We have this attitude that if you did not learn with a camera that did nothing else controlled shutter speed and aperture to expose the medium ... you do not know anything about photography (I am somewhat included in this category).
Learning how to expose a specific film (as exposure latitude an sensitivity changed with different films) was something a good film photographer tried to master.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 17, 2010)

O|||||||O said:


> Wow, I hope that wasn't here.
> 
> To answer a few of your questions:
> 
> ...



Thank you!

Can I now continue with a string of questions? I dont expect them to be answered all or soon, just whoever wants to answer, thanks a million.

Zone system. I have read articles about it, but no books about it. How deep should we go to learn it? On the level of an entire book, or on the level like books that make it simple on 60 pages or  Zone System Simplified  or something or is one article enough?   

What confuses me too, before I even start to learn Zone system is the easiness of exposure film outdoors. I cannot understand how that Zone system can help when I am standing in a street, want to make sure the sky is not overexposed. What I do is just point the camera at the lightest spot on the sky, meter, lock it, change the composition and shoot. Then I end up with a picture I can work with - adjust contrast, curves. The exposure and negative look just spot on whenever I use this technique . I don't lose any detail in shades and can go all contrasty or not. Is Zone system unnecessary  in this situation? I read an article about Spot metering that says it works just like I have just described it. 

And one more question that is directly linked with the one above. If the books say that with film you have to meter the shadows, not lights, how do I know if I overexpose sky or face? Say I want to shoot a portrait indoors. Film, I meter the darkest part of the jacket, shirt, whatever, lock exposure, change the composition, shoot. I end up with ugly overexposed face. Or not? If the light is pretty harsh, I cannot imagine how I could avoid overexposing the face, unless we talk about developing that film in a way that would shrink the dynamic range as to get well exposed lights.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 17, 2010)

dxqcanada said:


> The thing with film is that you have four tools to manipulate ...
> 
> Exposure of the film
> Development of the film (if possible)
> ...



I agree, I want to try to master it.  I doubt there were any great photographers in the history who didn't master the technique. On the other hand when I look at anton corbijn, it seems like a technique very easily achieved without knowing much theory. I am sure he knows his job very well, he is a pro film guy, but it seems, just seems so easy to make contrasty BW pictures. Plus I see such pictures everywhere. That confuses me a lot. So much contrast and you have to know the details about exposure?  Isn't it a bit as if a punk rock guitarist wanted to master Bach?
I am not saying I want to make just and only such contrasty looking pictures with a lot of grain and black. But wouldn't it be easy?


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 17, 2010)

I will say that the Zone System is a great tool for those shooting/developing/printing large format.
The key to using the Zone System is manipulating the film exposure, coupled with a development change to that frame, and finally the manipulation of the print exposure.

You really cannot do that with roll film as you really cannot develop individual frames (as you can do with large format sheet film).

I learned the Zone System with Large Format (4x5).
Meter the scene.
Visualize how different parts of the scene will appear in the final print.
Expose the film
Mark the that frame for the required development change
Develop the film
Print the film

I carried what I learned to roll film ... which really is only learning to read/meter light (as zones) and understand exposure latitude of film.

If you really want to know the Zone System then you need all three of Ansel Adam's books ... the Camera, the Negative, and the Print.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 17, 2010)

dxqcanada said:


> I will say that the Zone System is a great tool for those shooting/developing/printing large format.
> The key to using the Zone System is manipulating the film exposure, coupled with a development change to that frame, and finally the manipulation of the print exposure.
> 
> You really cannot do that with roll film as you really cannot develop individual frames (as you can do with large format sheet film).
> ...



From what you write it seems the Zone system is hardly applicable for 35mm photography. 

Hmmm. I will leave it now and see if there are any other comments tomorrow. Thanks for now.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 17, 2010)

Or not. Here is what I found and it seems in accord with all you have written so far. 

*The Zone System for 35MM Photographers: A Basic Guide to Exposure Control (Paperback)*


The reviews say that it is a book that won't overwhelm the reader with too much scientific analysis and can be understood by common people like I am. It's basically supposed to be for people who take photography seriously but don't have the scientific backrgound to understand Adams' books on the zone system. 

One  reader said it helped him to improve his ability to control exposure a lot.


----------



## Actor (Jan 17, 2010)

dxqcanada said:


> Digital offers a level of control that is really not possible with film


Not true.  There's nothing that digital offers that cannot be done with film, nor does digital offer more control.  Prior to processing there are only three things to control: shutter speed, aperture and ISO.  In manual mode the photographer has control over shutter speed and aperture with both digital and film.  With digital you can change ISO by pushing a button while with film you have to change backs or bodies, but that's convenience, not control.



> (or is too complex).


Meaning that digital has a computer in it and you can give control to it.  Taken to an extreme this line of reasoning is an excuse to buy a P&S and give up all control. -- In any case the point is not valid.  My PS-20 (a film camera) has a computer in it that is just as powerful as any you'll find in a digital camera, bells and whistles excluded.


----------



## djacobox372 (Jan 18, 2010)

It's as complicated or simple as you make it.  Digital systems  have been designed to mimic film standards, so they really aren't all that different.  

A couple things:

1) You shouldn't underexpose negative film like you have been digital, negative film doesn't clip out the highlights like digital can--if you shoot positive slide film, then slight underexposure is a good idea.

2) If you're coming from a digital world, consider medium or larger format film--they compliment small format digital rather well.  35mm film is more of an alternative to digital, not a compliment.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

I think my confusion is beginning to fade. I started to read terri's BW beginner's primer and it explains a lot I could not understand. Why learning exposure in detail, why zone system, why developing matters etc etc. 

My main problem was that as in other art forms, I never relied on mastering a craft. My favorite painters either did not know how to draw (the craft) or didn't use that in their art. Most painters who did know the craft to me were boring. One of my favorite classical music composer never studied composition and still composed symphonic works. One of the best photographs I've ever seen were taken with point and shoot camera and the photographer knew basically nothing about photography. My favorite jazz trumpet players like Miles Davis were never famous for technique, rather criticized. To me, feeling things, doing
 things according to intuition, emotion, passion led to great results, of course, a lot of work was necessary, lots of years of dedication, too.      

So when I started to read about the zone system and calculating exposure values etc etc I thought - it is like people who buy vinyl records because they sound better, they buy high end record players and high end speakers 
and they think mp3 is trash. I also have high end speakers at home but when I listen to Shostakovitch or Miles Davis , mp3 is good enough. Most professioanal musicians I know  have awful stereos .Some of them just have portable CD players and listen to their recordings of Beethoven on that. 

But it doesn't work like that in photography. I can limit myself to point and shoot pictures in certain light condition and make it my style. But to explore photography without being limited by some kind of lab developing, some kind of exposure mistakes etc... requires to study the laws step by step. I thought what Corbijn does is maybe a punk style photography where you only need to know three chords, no schools necessary. But I was probably wrong and his works are based, although it is not seen clearly, on knowing how to expose, develop and enlarge. It is only easy to imitate with curves. I think he has things under control, while I only work with coincidence. I can use one of 20 exposures and maybe make it a nice photograph. A real photographer will probably ruin only one or two exposures out 36 so they can choose from plenty. 

Sorry if I am too long, but I just wanted to explain my confusion and that I might begin to understand what the bottom line is.


----------



## Mike_E (Jan 18, 2010)

Miles spent more time with his trumpet than most photographers will ever spend with a camera.  It does take practice.

For specializing in B&W I would suggest that you get a grey card and practice with your spot meter.  Most of the grain you are looking for is done with the film type but the mood is done with exposure. 

If you can use the spot meter to get the overall exposure correct then you can compensate to bring your subject's exposure value up or down to suit your mood.  This is where the Zone System is helpful because after you've learned it you will have a good idea just how much to raise or lower your settings.





Be aware though, if you lower or raise the exposure for mood and then show your photos on an internet forum you are going to get the it's too dark/ too light comments from the snapshooters.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 18, 2010)

You do not need to master all the technical aspects of photography to produce stunning images.

Compare Ansel Adams to Edward Weston ... they both stunning B+W images, they were friends ... but Ansel wanted to understand and control every aspect of the processes ... while Edward did not.
Beyond the technical aspects ... they both had the ability to see the image and reproduce it.

Most film photographers understood what the tools and material can do to the end result. This would be the same with our current Digital photographic tools.
You don't need to master everything ... but you should understand what your tools/material can do for you.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

Yes, it is slowly beginning to make sense how much I should learn. 

Do you guys think *The Zone System for 35MM Photographers: A Basic Guide to Exposure *Control  would be enough? Or terri's articles on the Zone system enough? 

I have one question, once we somehow learn to manually set the exposure, what about that AUTO setting in an old Nikon FE and such cameras, where you only choose aperture and rely on the camera to pick the proper shutter speed? Is that for sissies? Or for ocassions when we don't have time to manually set everything? 

To sum up about the range of skills and experience, I would say the wider the range is the wider the field in which we may express ourselves is. Jimmy Hendrix knew nothing about musical theory and his music was great but covered a very narrow musical field. Miles Davis knew all about complicated jazz harmonies and even invented his own scales and chords. Then there are fantastic blues singers who only know how to sing blues. A friend took a fantastic picture with his PS camera several times but he never became a photographer, only picked amazing people, moments and situations and made the best out of them with the little camera. Stunning pictures. So everyone must decide how great the scope of photography they want to master or at least learn to express themselves. So to me I would like to learn to have things under control when making BW photographs on film. Zones, darkroom, negatives are all waiting for me now.


----------



## ann (Jan 18, 2010)

professional use the mode that gets the job done. learning what they all do will assist in making that decision.

IMHO, it is important to balance creative vision with technical knowledge. If you have a great idea but are clueless how to put it on paper your not going to get very fair. If you have all the technical aspects down pat and don't understand or have any creative talent the photos are not very good.

As your education grows with practice and experience; which means fill the learning bin answers will appear 

The harder you practice the "luckier" you get.

Oh, by the way; professional make lots of mistakes
1. they are willing to experiment and try a wide variety of techniques and not all are successful
2. you only get to the see the successful ones


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 18, 2010)

I use Shutter or Aperture priority (semi-Auto modes) in situation where I have no time to manually adjust them AND the scene is balanced good enough that an average meter reader will produce a usable exposure.


----------



## Mike_E (Jan 18, 2010)

Ryunin, something that you haven't mentioned but I will bring up is to shoot with both eyes open.

One thing that no amount of skill can control is the progression of time.  Try and always be aware of your surroundings and their effects on your subjects.  I'm not nearly the first nor the last to say it but photography is really all about capturing the moments of your life so that you can share them with others.  Great photography is made from great moments.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

ann said:


> professional use the mode that gets the job done. learning what they all do will assist in making that decision.
> 
> IMHO, it is important to balance creative vision with technical knowledge. If you have a great idea but are clueless how to put it on paper your not going to get very fair. If you have all the technical aspects down pat and don't understand or have any creative talent the photos are not very good.
> 
> ...



it all makes sense and i agree, thank you


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

Mike_E said:


> Ryunin, something that you haven't mentioned but I will bring up is to shoot with both eyes open.
> 
> One thing that no amount of skill can control is the progression of time.  Try and always be aware of your surroundings and their effects on your subjects.  I'm not nearly the first nor the last to say it but photography is really all about capturing the moments of your life so that you can share them with others.  Great photography is made from great moments.



this is the part of photography that my brain is gulping down very well i think, the philosophy of it, the why of it, this is the main reason i want to do it, discover something beautiful, even bitterly beautiful or something bitterly true, to separate garbage from pearls, authentic from fake...   

when i shoot in a pub being all confused about zone systems, meters, shutter speeds, etc etc i at least know i want to wait for the moment where the group of people around me all have their eyes opened, all look in the right directions, move not too much or just the way i want it, just wait for the right moment and when that picture is made then wonderful, i am a technical retard, but i love art and philosophy hidden beyond photography, or in other words, we all have our own philosophy of photography or are looking for it, working on it, this is something i do naturally, technical aspects are the hard ones for me


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

dxqcanada said:


> I use Shutter or Aperture priority (semi-Auto modes) in situation where I have no time to manually adjust them AND the scene is balanced good enough that an average meter reader will produce a usable exposure.



that makes sense, thank you


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 18, 2010)

The semi-Auto modes are good if you want to maintain a specific shutter speed or aperture ... and let the camera control the other.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

dxqcanada said:


> The semi-Auto modes are good if you want to maintain a specific shutter speed or aperture ... and let the camera control the other.



this is interesting, i always thought that to determine DOF, you have to choose aperture, hence you can leave the shutter speed alone 

when i shoot portraits, i usually use the .... missing words... maximum aperture, f1.8 or whatever I have available from my prime lenses

when i shoot landscape, i choose f11 or f 16

when i shoot a complete figure, f5.6 or something

if in most situations we prefer a certain aperture, why should we have to use manual setting?

it would only make sense if the batteries were dead or if the camera was manual only

i am not defending, just asking


----------



## djacobox372 (Jan 18, 2010)

ryunin said:


> dxqcanada said:
> 
> 
> > The semi-Auto modes are good if you want to maintain a specific shutter speed or aperture ... and let the camera control the other.
> ...



M = you control the exposure

Even the most fancy metering doesn't do nearly as good of job of choosing exposure as a skilled photographer.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 18, 2010)

Also the algorithm that calculates the exposure does not know what you have in mind. 

Many shooters are fine with the automatic exposure metering found in most modern cameras. An experienced photographer may want to manually control the exposure under a situation where they know the camera will be wrong in its calculation.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

Why does it take me so long to get things? Of course, you do choose a preferred aperture, but adjust the shutter speed according to the situation, if you know how to do it, of course. 


I don't want to start several new threads so let me keep asking here. 

After reading about the zone system over and over again at different sites, I came to the conclusion that it goes hand in hand with spot metering. 

Matrix is for people who for some reason want to trust it but it isn't for someone who wants to learn exposure. That leaves spot metering or center-weighted metering in my case, I have Nikon FE, which has the center-weighted metering and Nikon F75 which offers both matrix and spot. 

Would you recommend FE to start learning about manual exposure or F75 with its spot metering? Or should I buy a hand-held spot meter first and use it? I am not sure where to start. Read or shoot or both and with what equipment. 

I also thought it might be better to not mix learning to develop and learning to expose as I would never know where I made mistake - badly exposed or badly developed? I thought maybe I should learn to expose with Ilford XP2 to get consistent results from the lab and see my exposure mistakes and learn to develop as separate skills as for now.


----------



## ann (Jan 18, 2010)

there are other items that go into the DOF decision. FOcal length of the lens, and the focus point.

Many years ago, longer than you age, we had to manual meter and learn to meter as that was the only option.

Meters are meant to read the world as a 18% middle gray object, which it may or may not be what you want. It is clueless that snow should be white, or your favorite dog is black and it gives a middle gray recommendation.

If your using a aperture or shutter priorty option and correct for what you wish this to look like, your going to end up with the same quanity of light reaching the film but in a different manner.

with manual metering one can set a value and move the other around getting a different amount of light reaching the film creating the look your vision is dicating.

for instances with the snow for an example. i use f8 as my aperture priotry option and the shutter speeds moves to 125, but i want to open my aperture to 5.6 to increase the exposure so the snow is no longer gray, the shutter will go to 250 which is going to give me the same exposure but a different DOF.

However, with manual metering i can leave the shutter speed at 125 and open the aperture as much or as little as i like and the exposure will  change without the shutter speed changing.

because of my experience i also use manual metering and rarely ever use it's recommendation, but look at the light and decide what i what the image to look like before i fire the shutter.  This means when i get a new camera body, i have to go make some quick test to see how it is performing against my vision.

with film this means i may have to change the ISO and the development times and with digital it means i may under or over exposure a specific amount to make the exposure i want , not the one the meter thinks i need.


----------



## ann (Jan 18, 2010)

leaning does not come in a few minutes,
your trying to cram to many items into your learning.

Understanding the Zone System can certainly help you understand tonal values in greyscale. WIth 35mm film you need to commint the whole roll to one set of numbers; ie. ISO and development times.

Start off simple, KISS.

take a roll of film doesn't make any difference whos, are what ISO, altho , i think tri x or hp5+ will be more forgiving.

Set the ISO at 400 and take about 18 exposures, the change the ISO to 200 and finish off the roll. I am not sure if your doing your own developing yet,but take it in and have the prints made and then look at them and you will see right away which ISO is giving you the best shadow detail, and the most imformtion. 

Stick with that and the same shop so the developer and who ever is doing the work stays consistence and start taking more images and leaning as you go.

just use the camera meter, your making this much too difficult.

Is there some place you can take a class with someone who knows what they are doing in the darkroom. That should save you lots of time, energy and money.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

ann said:


> leaning does not come in a few minutes,
> your trying to cram to many items into your learning.
> 
> Understanding the Zone System can certainly help you understand tonal values in greyscale. WIth 35mm film you need to commint the whole roll to one set of numbers; ie. ISO and development times.
> ...



I feel very overwhelmed with all the information, i dont mean yours or anybody else here, just in general, it's hard to know where to start. I had no idea shooting film would be this complicated / most BW photographs I see everywhere look just like simple photos where exposure was no big deal - but that is the naive idea and in fact i am probably able to expose well only 5 % of what a skilled photographer can do. But that challenge  makes it even more interesting for me. With digital, I thought I had learned to expose with the help of matrix and RAW and camera raw I can't imagine how I could have a problem with that, I mean I had plenty of well exposed digital images,  but now I am a complete beginner. I have a friend who is going to teach me exposure and another one who is willing to teach me developing my films so I guess that will be a good way how to start.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 18, 2010)

ann said:


> leaning does not come in a few minutes,
> your trying to cram to many items into your learning.
> 
> Understanding the Zone System can certainly help you understand tonal values in greyscale. WIth 35mm film you need to commint the whole roll to one set of numbers; ie. ISO and development times.
> ...



btw what does start off simple KISS mean? Is KISS an abreviation of something? or your personal encouragement?


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 18, 2010)

ahhh ... "Keep It Simple, and Stupid" or "Keep It Simple, Stupid" or "Keep It Short and Simple" or ...


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 18, 2010)

I honesty do not think you need to know the Zone System to shoot B+W (other than large format).
I will say that it helped me visualize better ... especially when I was doing my own printing.

Jimi Hendrix may not have known about Music Theory ... but he did know how to take full advantage of his Tools, the same way a knowledgeable photographer would.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 19, 2010)

dxqcanada said:


> I honesty do not think you need to know the Zone System to shoot B+W (other than large format).
> I will say that it helped me visualize better ... especially when I was doing my own printing.
> 
> Jimi Hendrix may not have known about Music Theory ... but he did know how to take full advantage of his Tools, the same way a knowledgeable photographer would.


 
so should i forget zones, spot metering and just use matrix? could you suggest some first steps that should be taken? thanks


----------



## ann (Jan 19, 2010)

put your meter in matrix mode and try the suggest i made several post back about changeing the ISO half way through the roll and then compare the detail especially the shadow detail. Which means see how much detail is available. 

If you don't have the detail on the negative, you can't put it on the paper.

take lots of photos. learn to develop your own film so you can become more consistence. Months from know then you can review the zone theory to better understand grey scale placement . You will need to have more experience with manual metering to speed up the process of changing options . So at some time switch to manual metering if you want to pursue the ZOne system; however , as had been mentioned before that system was developed for LF film or for 120 film with interchangeable backs.

it is not a matter of forgetting, it is a matter of deciding the level of technical knowledge you wish to know and use. If you find your prints are great with because you have determined your EI for your equipment then continue to work in that manner.

YOur trying to do too much. YOu can't pour years of information into several weeks or even months.

You could learn a terrific amount if you spent at least 50 hours a week in the darkroom for at least one year, but most people don't have that kind of time when they are your age .

This is a hands on craft, get out and start taking photos and remember every photographer has made the same mistakes, every one from Ansel Adams to Platon (doesn't make any difference) so you are in good company.

ps. KISS means Keep it Simple, very Simple (i hate the word stupid)
EI means expousre index ( when you determine times other than the box speed and recommended development times.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 19, 2010)

ryunin said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I hope that wasn't here.
> ...




When im shooting in the street i take a reading off my hand and shoot away http://gsgary.smugmug.com/Street-Scenes/Street-Photography/Scan10006ps/702267616_LdQrG-L.jpg


----------



## ann (Jan 19, 2010)

the palm of your hand is still middle gray, but it is a good method to use if your hand is in the same lighting as the subject and you can't get closer for a better reading.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 19, 2010)

As there is no EXIF data recorded ... you should make notes on exposure. 

... ah I forgot to add ... as a film shooter you should get used to "reading" a negative for it's density levels, as the print may not be the best reference.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 19, 2010)

thank you everyone for the tips!

could you go / if you are not too busy or bored with my questions/ and check my "Kids" gallery at my web Roman Valek Photography which consists only of pictures taken with my film camera and tell me if you can see exposure related technical mistakes - providing something like that is possible as there was a lab development involved and lab scanning - I only did the shooting (aperture priority and spot metering) and postprocessed the scans from the lab in Photoshop, so maybe there is no way to see what I did myself in terms of exposure / are such pictures just a matter of chance on my part? is it impossible to evaluate the mistakes of the photographer from such pictures if the photographer didn't develop the film by himself or herself?


----------



## cfeldman10 (Jan 19, 2010)

I started learning film photography in school before buying a DSLR camera. I find that understanding the basics of film really helped with shooting digitally - even thought I never shot stills on film and only movies. After experimenting more with stills photography, I feel like I can control so much of my image and know how to achieve certain looks.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 20, 2010)

It seems before I develop negatives on my own, the technical quality of my film photographs is impossible to judge. Will it be possible to see mistakes in exposure when I develop film on my own? On the one hand it seems the learning curve o film photography is extremely steep and people talk about hundreds of exposures before one has at least some technical skills. On the other hand lots of people say to develop a negative is a matter of one afternoon and with matrix metering most shots will be exposed properly. What would be the next step then?


----------



## ann (Jan 20, 2010)

developing film is very simple. as to learning to read the negative will take some time to learn.

Yes, to become a master printer takes time and work.

Just take some film, start taking pictures, develop the negatives and start making some prints.  
There are some good basic books available , and in fact ilford has some very good tutorials on line . you might check out Henry Horenstein "Black and White Photography, A Basic Manual"  It has been used for many years in many class rooms.

another would be the Upton book on photographer which has also been found in many classrooms.

I think it would be helpful to you to start listening to only one voice as you have so many people offering advise (which is a good thing) but it is bouncing all over the place.

Just start with A. which is making images (use the same film , same camera and the same processing location; either lab or youself. Again the technical will come with the practice, not just reading and trying to figure out so many variables at one time.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 20, 2010)

Learn how to read a negative.
It will tell you about your exposure.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 20, 2010)

OK.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 20, 2010)

ryunin said:


> It seems before I develop negatives on my own, the technical quality of my film photographs is impossible to judge. Will it be possible to see mistakes in exposure when I develop film on my own? On the one hand it seems the learning curve o film photography is extremely steep and people talk about hundreds of exposures before one has at least some technical skills. On the other hand lots of people say to develop a negative is a matter of one afternoon and with matrix metering most shots will be exposed properly. What would be the next step then?



When you look at your negs it's the opposite to digital, if they are dark you have overexposed, bright underexposed


----------



## ann (Jan 20, 2010)

gsgary, we are talking about black and white negatives. or pehapes it is your use of dark and bright.  If the negatives are dense and the prints are too bright they are overexposed. If the negative is thin the prints will be dark, which is underexposed.

yes, it is wonderful to learn how to read the negative, but one starts out they may be clueless about what is what. It would be helpful to find someone in your area that may be able to mentor you and show you a set of negatives that are normal, over/under exposed.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 20, 2010)

ann said:


> gsgary, we are talking about black and white negatives. or pehapes it is your use of dark and bright.  If the negatives are dense and the prints are too bright they are overexposed. If the negative is thin the prints will be dark, which is underexposed.
> 
> yes, it is wonderful to learn how to read the negative, but one starts out they may be clueless about what is what. It would be helpful to find someone in your area that may be able to mentor you and show you a set of negatives that are normal, over/under exposed.



That's what i meant dark negs will let less light through, overexposed neg


----------



## Derrel (Jan 20, 2010)

Reading through this thread, I see that ryunin is metering the scene AS IF he were using color transparency film or digital capture--by metering the brightest sky value, locking that value in, and the re-composing and photographing. That is not a the way to meter and expose a scene when one is shooting B&W negative film; that is a method called "pegging the highlights", and is the way one exposes narrow-latitude transparency film.

As far as using the "Matrix" metering of a camera, to me "Matrix" means,specifically NIKON's own color-evaluative light metering, and no other brand. But it is also a huge mistake to use a multi-point, whole-frame light metering pattern as the basis for reflected light readings done using a camera as the "light meter". Nikon's Matrix metering is RGB color-aware, as well as distance aware, and it uses distance, focus distance, and RGB values, as well as simple reflectance values, to discern the actual color of subjects, and as such it is a "smart" metering system, and not a "dumb" metering system which measures ONLY reflectance values.

If you want to use a camera as a reflected light meter, you need to use it in something other than "Matrix" if it's a Nikon camera, and some other mode than evaluative, or multi-area, or honeycomb metering if it is another brand. The best choice would be a very narrow-angle metering pattern like spot metering, or selective metering. A reaal, honest to goodness reflected light meter with an analog scale would be a wonderful tool for a beginner--an old-styler meter like a Weston Master IV would make the Zone System come to life, especially if you happened to have the original instruction book for it. Failing that, a newer meter like a Gossen Luna-Pro, with the analog scales, would really,really be helpful for a beginner to understand how to "See" the entire range of exposures, and see the way to "shift" light readings from one actual point to the desired point on the negative's scale.

One of the biggest problems is lack of understanding, and if the OP is measuring a bright highlight value and failing to "place" that at the right zone, or if the OP happens to read a deep shadow area and fails to place that at a low zone, and instead shoots at the suggested reading, it's possible he has terribly underexposed and then over-exposed shots, alternating throughout the rolls he's shooting.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 20, 2010)

ann said:


> gsgary, we are talking about black and white negatives. or pehapes it is your use of dark and bright.  If the negatives are dense and the prints are too bright they are overexposed. If the negative is thin the prints will be dark, which is underexposed.
> 
> yes, it is wonderful to learn how to read the negative, but one starts out they may be clueless about what is what. It would be helpful to find someone in your area that may be able to mentor you and show you a set of negatives that are normal, over/under exposed.



i agree that i am asking too many questions now, i  am meeting a guy tomorrow who is experienced in darkroom, printing and exposure and is willing to help me, i will bring a bunch of my negatives and we will have a look at them and he will give me some basic advice how to start my first shooting negatives that i will later develop in my own "darkroom", probably a bathroom


----------



## ann (Jan 20, 2010)

good that you have found someone to sit down with and review the negatives, etc.


you haven't been asking too many questions, that is how we learn.


----------



## ryunin (Jan 20, 2010)

Derrel said:


> Reading through this thread, I see that ryunin is metering the scene AS IF he were using color transparency film or digital capture--by metering the brightest sky value, locking that value in, and the re-composing and photographing. That is not a the way to meter and expose a scene when one is shooting B&W negative film; that is a method called "pegging the highlights", and is the way one exposes narrow-latitude transparency film.
> 
> As far as using the "Matrix" metering of a camera, to me "Matrix" means,specifically NIKON's own color-evaluative light metering, and no other brand. But it is also a huge mistake to use a multi-point, whole-frame light metering pattern as the basis for reflected light readings done using a camera as the "light meter". Nikon's Matrix metering is RGB color-aware, as well as distance aware, and it uses distance, focus distance, and RGB values, as well as simple reflectance values, to discern the actual color of subjects, and as such it is a "smart" metering system, and not a "dumb" metering system which measures ONLY reflectance values.
> 
> ...



yes, i was clueless, by using spot metering i thought i was "making Sure" the picture would not be overexposed where i desperately needed texture (face and hands) but as you suggest i was going up and down and only outdoors had some consistent results / only yesterday i realized with my digital camera that spot metering a white wall makes the wall middle gray, anyway when using matrix for all kinds of shots within my apartment and with both dynamic and low contrast scenes, the matrix came up with excellent solution, without over or underexposing, but then of course this doesnt' work if we want to have much more details in dark areas and want to sacrifice lights and windows 

i think an analog hand held light meter sounds like what most experienced photographers advice - i am shopping tomorrow for films, developing stuff and will check the meters in the shop


----------



## ryunin (Jan 21, 2010)

I am so excited. I have just met the guy from a Czech photo forum who saw some of my negatives and shocked me when he pointed to some parts that I'd mistakenly ruined as I'd forgotten to change the shutter speed - it was left at 1/90s manual, for no batteries situation with FE . I thought those were ruined and those where the images I wanted to retake after I checked the setting and metered according to the sky, of course much shorter time. He said those "ruined" ones were good and those where I stuck to metering according to the sky were underexposed losing details in shadows. I couldn't believe it, but trusted him. Then he taught me how to basically meter in the cafe we were sitting. I went home, tried to scan the "ruined" part of the negative and thought for sure it wouldn't be any good, that sure it would be overexposed. Although after scanning the images did look awfully bright, the histogram of the scanning software didn't show any overexposure. I opened the scanned images in the photoshop, again, no problem with overexposure, so I twisted the curves - decreased the midtone brightness, decreased contrast and I got a beautifully detailed, neutrally toned image! Incredible, next time I will make sure I don't underexpose and really meter according to the shades and don't worry about highlights. That will be the first step, I guess. I was sooo wrong! I have bought all the chemicals today and the guy's going to help me develop my first film - unfortunately underexposed as was my bad habit until tonight. 

At last I am beginning to see the direction of my future learning. And from now on, photography will be even more exciting to me. Thanks for all the tips, it is so difficult to explain things when people don't meet in real life. I will go through this thread again and everything will make more sense now.


----------

