[rollei_list] Re: Plus X -PX 125- and Microdol X discontinued Alan
- From: "Marvin" <marvin0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 09:58:05 +0800
Hello Mark, I have 10 or so zone system books that I would recommend such as
Henry Hornstien's, or one of my teacher John Blakemore's.
I never used variable graded paper, since it is not as rich in silver as
graded paper. I am able to print all of my negatives on either grade 2 or
the 3 paper, since my negatives fall within the range of printability
(taking into account my personal preference).
I was taught and believe that variable contrast paper is a corrective
measure, and that it is better to place your negs where they can be printed
on the best paper. Here is one of the world's leading proponents of the
system though you cannot guage the sheer beauty of the prints online:
http://collection.britishcouncil.org/collection/artist/5/18331
Thanks,
Marvin.
-----Original Message-----
From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Rabiner
Sent: 19 February 2010 08:39
To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Plus X -PX 125- and Microdol X discontinued Alan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marvin" <marvin0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 1:03 PM
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Plus X -PX 125- and Microdol X
> discontinued Alan
>
>
>> Eric, Mark is spot on. N+1 is zone system speak, it means
>> increasing the
>> overall contrast in the negative by 10%. Each zone should
>> have 10% more
>> density so when its printed on a grade 1 paper or say
>> becomes a platinum
>> print it should represent a normal scence, which zone
>> values placed in the
>> correct value. i.e skin zone 6 which was zone 7 in the N+1
>> negative.
>> Adams was not changing the ISO in any way shape or form,
>> which would have
>> defeated the whole purpose of the zone system.
>
> I am not sure you are saying what you intend. If all
> densities are increased by the same percentage the contrast
> remains the same. The idea of the Zone System is to adjust
> contrast to match the requirements of the scene and adjust
> exposure to maintain the density range of the film. That is
> exactly what one gets from conventional sensitometric
> principles, i.e., increasing contrast required decreasing
> exposure and vice-versa. '
> I have serious questions about the Zone System because
> I think it ignors the characteristics of human vision. It
> seems to be concerned with the ability of the system to
> record the full range of brightness of the original scene on
> the print. Since reflection prints have a very much shorter
> range of reproducible densities than either the original
> scene or film, or than the eye, some compression has to be
> done for high contrast scenes. Converseley, low contrast
> scenes are stretched. Either will result in tone rendition
> which is seen by the eye as un-natural despite having good
> detail in both shadows and highlights. The eye judges scene
> contrast mosly by the mid-tones. If those are reproduced
> linearly the overall image will be acceptable. Some
> compression of highlights and shadows by local control,
> i.e., burning and dodging, will bring out details in both
> that are beyond the normal range of the paper. As long as
> the mid tones are OK the eye will accept the image as being
> natural looking. I am quite sure Adams and the other
> founders of the Zone System knew this. It is interesting to
> compare the approach of the Zone System to that of Kodak
> researcher Loyd Jones, who did extensive work on tone
> reproduction over a thirty year period. Jones was
> responsible for the speed measuring method originally
> adopted by the ASA. While that system is no longer in use
> the DIN system, adopted about 1958, and which is the basis
> for the current ISO speed method, was modified to take into
> account Jones findings about minimum exposure for good
> shadow detail.
I will say that development expansions and contraptions became less and less
a big deal with Adams and a lot of zone system practitioners and I can for
sure speak for me. I stopped doing it at all decades ago.
Using a higher contrast paper for lower contrast negs or a higher contrast
printing filter seemed like just as good of an idea instead of the idea of
making all your negs print on the same grade paper. Which is in the end not
such a big deal. And even might have some negative aspects. When I teach
the zone system to people I don't go in the the contractions and expansions
so much as people find them confusing and I think its not so necessary. But
its nice to know how film works.
Giving your negs more development is going to make you have to reach for
lower and lower contrast paper before it does anything to increase your iso,
din, or ASA. Film speed. Which is measured by density in the shadows.
People will put down the zone system but I've never heard much negative
stuff about it from people who have put an effort into figuring it out....
Reading much about it and trying it out a bit. Even if its in the far back
of your mind it tends to be thought of as a lesson well learned - and
appreciated. At first at school I ignored it with a few finds of mind
sitting in the back of the class saying it had no application to 35mm
photography which was basically what we were doing. But that was ignorance.
A few months later after that photo class in college I got a job as a
printer in a black and white custom printing lab. My boss told me to bring
up zone III to IV. I spend the weekend pulling all nighters reading my
textbook. On Monday I was ready to know what he was talking about.
I have to see understanding the zone system made me feel like I understood
photography for the first time I'd been floundering in the darkroom since I
was 13. I've never heard it expressed that sensomitry and the zone system
were at odds. That textbook by the way was Arnold Gasson Handbook for
Contemporary Photography there was as much zone system stuff as sensitometry
For every zone he had a sensitometric number.
[Rabs]
Mark William Rabiner
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
