I have been reading 'Beyond the Zone System' with the view to improve my 35mm and 120 negatives. However I am hampered by the fact that I don't have a densitometer, spot meter or a shop to build the holder and no intentions of buying any of the above. I realize that the system is really meant for individually developed negs but feel that alot of it can be adapted for improved negs of any format. I was wondering if it would be possible to get a roll of exposed 35mm film with a series of known densities to at least be able to approximate my values by eye. I think that if the steps were fine enough that it would be useful. Does anyone know of a service that could provide this film or would be willing to create one that I could then purchase? Thanks and merry christmas.

-- andy laycock (agl@intergate.bc.ca), December 21, 1998

Answers

Why don't you try some "seat of the pants Zone System"? That is, using the basic principles of the system without resorting to the level of precision that would require a densitometer and the endless calibrations you describe. Specifically, overexpose and underdevelop to improve your shadow detail and control your highlights. If more photographers followed this simple rule, the quality of b&w photography in this world would skyrocket overnight. Try 120 Delta 400 rated at ISO 80 developed in PMK Pyro for 7 minutes @ 70F. Print on a soft paper like Ilford MG FB warmtone, develop in Ektonol Type 2 (*not* Dektol!). Tone in selenium to completion.

-- Peter Hughes (leonine@redshift.com), December 22, 1998.

thanks for the tips

Thanks for the replies to my question. I haven't looked up the step tablet but will, however I've noticed that photo accesories are ridiculously overpriced (check out Nikon eyecup mounts sometime) and I hate to encourage the bastards. I was thinking that a roll of 36 exposures of stepwise, known densities would be all I would ever need. Then I could contact print both this film and my test films on the same paper using the minimum exposure to print the base + fog black and then merely comparing each individual 'neg' image with the standards. I am hoping that I would be able to construct film curves this way and see no reason why it shouldn't work - perhaps the paper would be the limiting factor? If anyone can forsee major problems with this I would really appreciate hearing it now.

-- andy laycock (agl@intergate.bc.ca), December 22, 1998.

Beyond the Zone System is an excellent book. It was mentioned that you shouldn't waste your time with all the calibration needed for this approach to the zone system, I can tell everything that I could ever want to know about a film and developer combination in under two hours. I use Phil Davis' Plotter software but not the Matcher, I don't think that you should let a computer tell you how to print a negative. Any decent photo lab and also many places where X-rays are done have densitometers. I have never paid to use one but a small charge would probably be acceptable. If you really want to understand the realtionship between exposure and development you should follow the advice given in Beyond the Zone System.

-- Jeff White (zonie@computer-concepts.com), December 23, 1998.

advice

The great thing about the responses to my question has been the variety of philosophies surrounding the technical aspects of securing that great negative. As some know I am not overly fond of talking about developers and Dmax's etc. - preferring to concentrate on the creative aspects of photography - but I have to admit that those who understand the process tend to produce images with that extra quality that comes with a good negative and print. For myself I want (and need) to see first hand the relationship (via graphs) between exposure, development and density distribution of the material that I have chosen to use. I have tried the 'overexpose - underdevelop' protocol and have not been satisified with the results. I have a studio and grey card at my disposal so I might as well make use of it during the dark, cold months of winter when I tend to shoot less. However to do this I need reliable reference material for calibration and making my own defeats the whole purpose. If a kind-hearted individual, with confidence in their equipment and abilities, wants to produce the film strip that I have described I would happily pay them for their effort.

-- andy laycock (agl@intergate.bc.ca), December 23, 1998.

Andy: Gordon Hutchings in his Book of Pyro describes the construction and use of a 'zone board.' This is an easy to build (about $10 worth of materials, and a hour or two) and easy to calibrate and use. Basically it makes a continuous (as opposed to stepped) density strip. Pyro is not any more difficult to use than any other developer, especially now that it is available in liquid form. Pyro negatives are much easier to print, especially on VC paper. In additon, if you are using a condenser enlarger, the stained image reduces the callier effect. It seems that all B&W film is overrated by about one stop. It is best to do your own personal film speed tests, but lacking that, just cut the rated speed in half.

-- Michael D Fraser (mdfraser@earthlink.net), December 23, 1998.

Andy, Look at your prints and then look at prints by any of your favorite printers. Are your prints close in look as theirs regardless of content? Are your whites nice and crisp and blacks black as night? Are your midtones where you want them? Even if all you want are midtones are they're relationships where they should be? If you're not satisfied, then learn all you can about the "system" of photography. Yes "system". Yeah, you don't need a densiwhatyoumacallit. Hell, I don't own one either but my prints are scrumptious because I learned the system. You should know the reasons behind why the zonies do what they do. Using the zone is so rewarding once you get the feeling for it. Before I learned the system I wasted tons of materials. It would have been cheaper to use a small portion of this material learning the system in the first place. Make the effort and find your proper film speed and your correct printing time for max-black in a print with your set-up. From there it is a piece of cake to place whatever tone you want pretty much wherever you want. Your prints will sparkle as never before. It wont be luck anymore. Even if you vision is a portrait that you want soft and only have the higher midtones. You will end up burning and dodging a lot less. And don't believe what you hear about the great artists not being hung-up on technique. They weren't because they took the time in the beginning to learn all they could to get what they saw in the view finder and in their minds creative eye onto a print. There are a lot of ways to learn the system. It doesn't matter which one you choose to learn from, just learn what your materials will do and then use this knowlege to make you vision as good as it can be. A. Adams said something about a fuzzy picture of a fuzzy concept. Don't get hung up in technique but by all means learn what the technique is telling you. James

-- james (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), January 08, 1999.

I am just getting started into the Zone system so I might be not the best of help but has anyone read the book by Kodak " Advanced Black & White Photography". They write about comparing your negatives with their projection print scale as an alternative to a densitometer. They say it takes some judgement but that it can be used. This is the direction I am taking. I hope it will be succesful. Any one intrested in this book I will gladly provide more detail or if you all think I should not take Kodak sujestions I would like to know that also.

-- Harry Vrobel (hvrobel@penn.com), January 12, 1999.

I, for one, have used the method suggested by Kodak in "Advanced Black and White Photography" (which employs their projection print scale) several times with various film/developer combinations quite sucessfully to determine a proper EI, based on a Xone I exposure. I find it quite easy to use (and reliable) for this purpose -- and you don't need a densitometer.

However, I personally have not found this method effective for determining proper film development times, as Kodak's book suggests. Instead, I have used the method advocated by Fred picker in his "Zone VI Workshop" (pages 34-37)which envolves visual inspection of a Zone VII print image.

I find that, whenever I choose a new film devloper combination (which thnkfully is too often) I need to spend several hours testing for EI and development times using these two methods. However the time invested turns out to be well worth it since it results in getting consitently properly exposed and developed negatives -- which (let's face it) is a prerequisite for sucessfull darkroom print making.

-- Bill Osterman (boster33@aol.com), February 05, 1999.