The Zone System, does it matter?

[Pablo]

It looks like we're getting somewhere. Some of the points you highlighted hit the nail on the head.



You write "... techniques ... are derived from the understanding of the system". This is the crux - they are not (though it may be that _you_ understood them via the zone system). Sure, if you learn the zone system, you may arrive at similar techniques. But these techniques do not have their origins in the zone system. You may want to reread the highlighted passage in the quote of Roger I cited earlier.

Sensitometry uses well-defined terms and measurable quantities like illuminance, exposure, density, reflectivity, etc, all of which significantly predate the "zone system". Everything you cite above can and has been derived from that.

What the zone system does is to divide continuous density or reflectivity ranges into discrete "zones" and label them with roman numerals. There is no physical justification for this kind of "quantization", and in fact, both the number of "zones" and where a "zone" begins and ends are arbitrary choices. Furthermore, the numbers given to the zones (roman numerals) have no physically or mathematically motivated relationship to sensitometric quantities. The zones are merely another layer on top of basic sensitometry, sacrificing the latter's advantages (well-defined, quantifyable) and contributing no new insights whatsoever. Even worse, the zone system's terminology only serves to obscure the straightforward, intuitive concepts of sensitometry, shrouding the basics of photographical technique with a sense of mystery where basic common sense would suffice. From a scientific point of view, the zone system is not a good theory, and from an educational point of view, it is a minor catastrophe.

As far as I know, the the zone system was originally devised as a "sensitometry for dummies" scheme for art students lacking a basic education (as is, unfortunately, a common occurence in the USA). Sensitometry is a much more basic and powerful concept, and anyone who has grasped mathematical concepts like graphs and logarithms, and physical concepts like measurable quantities, is equipped to almost intuitively understand it to a sufficient degree as to not have to resort to a crutch like the zone system and its arcane nomenclature. For most countries (including Singapore), this should mean anyone who made it through secondary school.

As to your other points, sure you can multiple camera backs and develop films differently. But, you can do all of this without the zone system.

And as far as photoshop is concerned, the versions I've seen plot histograms as continuously as they can given the discrete nature of digital data. I've yet to see a version that shows you histograms with 9 to 11 columns, labeled with roman numerals.

A question,

Do you use a Grey card ? or Do you use a White card ?

You earlier mentioned this, "First and foremost, "white" and "gray" are fundamentally the same thing. What you may refer to with "white" is just a brighter shade of gray."

With this in mind, can't you use a Black card ? if white and grey are fundamentally the same, isn't black also. ?

 

[student]

A question,

Do you use a Grey card ? or Do you use a White card ?

You earlier mentioned this, "First and foremost, "white" and "gray" are fundamentally the same thing. What you may refer to with "white" is just a brighter shade of gray."

With this in mind, can't you use a Black card ? if white and grey are fundamentally the same, isn't black also. ?

Pablo, see my post in #40.

According to this bloke, and bringing his "logic" to its conclusion, black is white!

 

[Pablo]

Hi student,

Yes, I read #40. Infact I read it all from the beginning.

I was curious to hear of his use or non use on cards, along with maybe an explanation as to what version of "white" the cards might be should he use one.

I am not shure that some of the last writing was not made with a mixture of cut and paste by simply finding text from articles, to suit an argument.

Therefore my interest in the answer to my question.

Cheers

 

[LittleWolf]

With this in mind, can't you use a Black card ? if white and grey are fundamentally the same, isn't black also. ?

No, you can't. The reflective flux RF emanating from a gray card of reflectivity R is related to illuminant flux IF by RF=R*IR. Obviously, for R=0 (black), this degenerates to 0=0, or in other words there is no reflective flux that could be measured in the first place.

Edit: I forgot to answer the first part of your question. I rarely use white/gray cards, for a variety of reasons.

 

[student]

Time and again, I noticed an interesting phenomenon.

The most ignorant types often tried to hide their ignorance by trying to confuse readers with lots of technical mumbo-jumbo.

This thread has again showed such a character.

In post #38, I blasted our "f*******d" when he showed an absolute ignorance with regards to interpretation of metering. He had tried to confused readers with a lot of technical mumbo-jumbo when he obviously have no clue what metering was all about. Unfortunately, his ignorance was so blatantly obvious and showed itself when I pushed him to give an answer.

Now again, in post #100 and #108, he resorted to mumbo-jumbo that says nothing. His affliction with self importance is beyong salvation.

RIP, hopefully!

Oh, how about being "opened to words of wisdom from artist"

? Selective blindness?

 

[singscott]

It looks like we're getting somewhere. Some of the points you highlighted hit the nail on the head.



You write "... techniques ... are derived from the understanding of the system". This is the crux - they are not (though it may be that _you_ understood them via the zone system). Sure, if you learn the zone system, you may arrive at similar techniques. But these techniques do not have their origins in the zone system. You may want to reread the highlighted passage in the quote of Roger I cited earlier.

Sensitometry uses well-defined terms and measurable quantities like illuminance, exposure, density, reflectivity, etc, all of which significantly predate the "zone system". Everything you cite above can and has been derived from that.

What the zone system does is to divide continuous density or reflectivity ranges into discrete "zones" and label them with roman numerals. There is no physical justification for this kind of "quantization", and in fact, both the number of "zones" and where a "zone" begins and ends are arbitrary choices. Furthermore, the numbers given to the zones (roman numerals) have no physically or mathematically motivated relationship to sensitometric quantities. The zones are merely another layer on top of basic sensitometry, sacrificing the latter's advantages (well-defined, quantifyable) and contributing no new insights whatsoever. Even worse, the zone system's terminology only serves to obscure the straightforward, intuitive concepts of sensitometry, shrouding the basics of photographical technique with a sense of mystery where basic common sense would suffice. From a scientific point of view, the zone system is not a good theory, and from an educational point of view, it is a minor catastrophe.

As far as I know, the the zone system was originally devised as a "sensitometry for dummies" scheme for art students lacking a basic education (as is, unfortunately, a common occurence in the USA). Sensitometry is a much more basic and powerful concept, and anyone who has grasped mathematical concepts like graphs and logarithms, and physical concepts like measurable quantities, is equipped to almost intuitively understand it to a sufficient degree as to not have to resort to a crutch like the zone system and its arcane nomenclature. For most countries (including Singapore), this should mean anyone who made it through secondary school.

As to your other points, sure you can multiple camera backs and develop films differently. But, you can do all of this without the zone system.

And as far as photoshop is concerned, the versions I've seen plot histograms as continuously as they can given the discrete nature of digital data. I've yet to see a version that shows you histograms with 9 to 11 columns, labeled with roman numerals.

I see this again as a very desperate attemp to mislead people by trying to agree on some and disagree with the rest for his ego. Firstly of what is the important of techniques in zone system orginated from. Is because of these orgins render zone system useless? In fact Ansel Adam wrote in the three books not all techniques in zone system are new or create by him. Zone system is the complete exposure guide or system that are suppose to help photographer that take the guess work out of exposure. Before the zone system mainly guess works were use in metering and the exposure of the film. The zone system does require you to use your brain and teach you how that is more important to me.

Then our joker go about attacking the zone system about this roman labeling system. Which I see this uncall for. Again he don't understand it. Does roman numbers need any farther understanding? What the different if I use indian or arab numbers? It is the numbers in zones we need to understand. Why the zone system needs scientific points of view to be a good "theory". Zone system uses all these so call theories to make sense of it all to photographer. That what make senses.

Then what funny, that why I am calling him a joker now. He claimed sensitometry can be easy understand by secondary student. Yet he didn't mention how a photographer could understand it, how a photographer can go about knowing sensitometry and use it practically.

If sensitometry is so easy to understand, why most of the photographer in singapore doesn't know it? And may I be daring to say most of us understand it by meaning and not by practically using it. Sensitometry if only exist in graph, then what use to a photographer? That where zone system made the senses to it all for photographer.

Then he go about you can do things which you would do in zone system without the zone system. Of course you can do that. In fact many photographers whom I meet do not know the zone system are doing that. But most do not know how to use the information they get. So what the point of using mutli backs, developing the films in different processes, where you at the first place you don't know what you are looking for? Without such system to help we are just blindly hoping to get it right. That what this joker is saying.

Then the last straw as he tried to challenge us to show how zone system is in photoshop. Funny he use histogram. Because histogram is part of the zone system. But it is not roman numbers, column 9 to 11 and ect ect....... he will tell you that. Again misinformation by this joker that people here are luck to have student, photobum and other to help to correct. But let me do it. Anyone who open the histogram will notice the dark point to the highlight point ranges from 0 to 255. Any one who read the books about the zone system or bother to. Will know zone 0 to 9 represent subject luminance level 0 to 255. That graph plot in the histograph is the one of sensitometry that will make sense to a person who practise zone system. From a histogram I can tell you what kind of picture it is and where it go wrong or right. If poeple want to see asideshow I am happy to get wolfy out and see who can read a histogram better!!! Lucky he did not say curve. Why? Curve come from zone system in fact the training video from adobe about photoshop will tell to you that. May be now he will say adobe is full of bullsh*t.

 

[photobum]

Good thing Doc and Scott are here to do all the thinking, researching and writing. Save me a bunch of work trying hard to reason with some people here, and also to justify the principles and applications of Zone System by not misleading others.

By the way, if Zone System is originally devised as a 'sensitometry for dummies', then we have a lot of retards on this forum. Since many of you cannot even understand the basic concepts of the system. Pardon me if I accidentally offended a few, but I am pin-pointing at those who claims that there are better systems than Zone System (yes, there are but not better), and Zone System is hard to understand (Too me, it is like pre-school education).

If you know how to read time from a clock or watch (analog type, with Roman/Arab/Indian numberings), you have absolutely no problem understanding the Zone System.

Example: It takes 25 minutes to travel from Yio Chu Kang MRT Station to Orchard MRT Station (Subject Brightness Range). My appointment is at 3:30pm. It takes 5 minutes to walk from my house to YCK station. So that I will not be late for my appointment, I must leave my house by 3:00pm (expansion or increase developing to hold the SBR) .

 

[LittleWolf]

and Zone System is hard to understand (Too me, it is like pre-school education).

I could have sworn that further up this thread you wrote you studied it in university ...

 

[photobum]

I could have sworn that further up this thread you wrote you studied it in university ...

I knew Zone System long before university. I started photography with a Rollei TLR at the age of 6 (I was in kindergarten). I am sure most of you were holding a toy camera at this age. I am not as old as you think. I am only 35. If you calculate, that is 29 years of experience.

Yes, I can say that I understand it even better after attending the university course at RIT. Principles of Zone System is considered a freshman level course at RIT.

Satisfied?

 

[singscott]

I could have sworn that further up this thread you wrote you studied it in university ...

Hahaha it so funny. :bsmilie: This "don't read thing" again.:bsmilie: Is that you are good for? Picking on people who know stuff where you think you know better:what: The sentence goes (Too me, it is like pre-school education). Doesn't have to mean he learn it in pre school!!!

 

[Bobman]

Anyway, here is another example of a participant who attended a B/W Developing Course without touching on ZS. After he had attended the workshop organised by COL and myself which is conducted by Student, he is now a happy man that his negative is far better than before.

To him, I believe he believes in the ZS now. He is now doing his own print base on the ZS.

 

[LittleWolf]

I knew Zone System long before university. I started photography with a Rollei TLR at the age of 6 (I was in kindergarten). I am sure most of you were holding a toy camera at this age. I am not as old as you think. I am only 35. If you calculate, that is 29 years of experience.

Yes, I can say that I understand it even better after attending the university course at RIT. Principles of Zone System is considered a freshman level course at RIT.

Satisfied?

I'm surprised you seem to know what I thought concerning your age. In any case, if RIT teaches a freshman class that to you is pre-school knowledge, I would suspect that either RIT is a rotten school, or you're a genius. RIT's reputation and your child prodigy story seem to support the latter.

Nevertheless, while you may think of yourself as an expert on the zone system, do you feel equally confident when it comes to the science on which sensitometry and photography are built? If not, how can you gauge the relevance of the zone system, and defend it against something that you don't know? Have you ever seriously looked beyond the narrow horizon of the zone system?

I have not studied the zone system at RIT and are therefore not an expert like you (I didn't even know about it when I was in kindergarten), but I think I know enough about light to see the zone system in context - a probably well-meant teaching tool that has been turned into a religious dogma by zealots.

I'm sure, if Ansel Adams had habitually whacked his camera with his shoe to release a stuck shutter, there would be some who insisted on whacking cameras with shoes as a quintessential step to good photography, and photography magazines would publish tests/reviews of shoes every now and then to fill the small gaps between the shoe advertisements. And they would come down hard on those who actually dared to reason about the necessity of whacking cameras with shoes instead of mindlessly regurgitating the "whack your camera with a shoe" mantra.

 

[photobum]

.......or you're a genius. RIT is a rotten school...... think of yourself as an expert on the zone system....

I don't consider myself a genius or proclaimed to be an expert in Zone System. Just someone with a clear conscious on how the Zone System works.

I did not read about Zone System until when I was in Secondary 3. I recalled borrowing this photography book from the school library which introduced it briefly in one of its chapters. This was when I started to explore its possibilities.

My father, who is a photo enthusiast for many, many years and an active member of PSS, did not fully understand its principles and concepts when I first introduced Zone System to him. Both of us, father and son, explore it together. Now, he is a 'zoney' too.

The title of this book - The Kodak Encyclopedia of Photography - Take Better Pictures.

Too me, RIT looks rotten. The buildings are old. The classrooms are old. The roof of the lecture hall is moldly and it leaks whenever there is a heavy downpour. The heaters are probably 100 years old (but they provide warmth to countless winter days especially in Rochester's unpredictable weather). The professors there are mostly in their 50s, and the oldest one is 89. The sports hall reminded me of Eadweard Muybridge's stop-motion scenes. But their education is far from rotten.

Do you use Kodak films and papers? If you do, you are using rotten films and papers. Why? Simply because most of the scientists, engineers, executives and interns working at Kodak headquarter are graduates of RIT.

Or do you use Fuji Xerox products? Guess what, again, you are using rotten copiers and printers if you do. 64% (2001 figure) of the folks working at FX graduated from RIT too.

 

[student]

but I think I know enough about light to see the zone system in context -

You know about light?

WAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I will be very kind to you, just for once.

The KEYWORD is "I THINK".

And since I do not expect much from a "f*******d", that thinking is plain wishful thinking. You know, a lot of m***ns" think they are geniuses. And a lot of "p*y*****cs" think they are Einstein!

Want me to prove my comments? They are all over in this thread!

 

[singscott]

I'm surprised you seem to know what I thought concerning your age. In any case, if RIT teaches a freshman class that to you is pre-school knowledge, I would suspect that either RIT is a rotten school, or you're a genius. RIT's reputation and your child prodigy story seem to support the latter.

Nevertheless, while you may think of yourself as an expert on the zone system, do you feel equally confident when it comes to the science on which sensitometry and photography are built? If not, how can you gauge the relevance of the zone system, and defend it against something that you don't know? Have you ever seriously looked beyond the narrow horizon of the zone system?

I have not studied the zone system at RIT and are therefore not an expert like you (I didn't even know about it when I was in kindergarten), but I think I know enough about light to see the zone system in context - a probably well-meant teaching tool that has been turned into a religious dogma by zealots.

I'm sure, if Ansel Adams had habitually whacked his camera with his shoe to release a stuck shutter, there would be some who insisted on whacking cameras with shoes as a quintessential step to good photography, and photography magazines would publish tests/reviews of shoes every now and then to fill the small gaps between the shoe advertisements. And they would come down hard on those who actually dared to reason about the necessity of whacking cameras with shoes instead of mindlessly regurgitating the "whack your camera with a shoe" mantra.

Where the dogma here? Who is the one that start to bark and attacking the people here, their school, Ansel Adam and a photography know how that use by alot of good photographer? Who is the big egoist zealot here. Time after time after so many of us have explain our stand who is the making this thread larger and offer nothing in return? The more you attack people here. More people will see you as the big egoist joker.

 

[LittleWolf]

I don't consider myself a genius or proclaimed to be an expert in Zone System. Just someone with a clear conscious on how the Zone System works.

But maybe not such a clear concious when it comes to forgery. I never wrote what you attributed to me further up the thread.

I did not read about Zone System until when I was in Secondary 3.

So you read about in secondary 3, but it is pre-school knowledge to you.

I'm sorry, but I don't think there's any sense in continuing this argument if you cannot maintain a coherent point of view or refrain from forging other's statements.

 

[photobum]

But maybe not such a clear concious when it comes to forgery. I never wrote what you attributed to me further up the thread.....I'm sorry, but I don't think there's any sense in continuing this argument if you cannot maintain a coherent point of view or refrain from forging other's statements.

Attribute to what????? Forgery???? Forge what???? Can you list them? You confuse me more than the time when I was learning the Zone System.

Please read carefully, it is 'pre-school education', not 'pre-school knowledge'. Please don't distort my initial meaning. I hate people who don't read and try to comment. Anyway, you are not the first one.

It is 'pre-school education' to me now. After so many years of exploring it. I conclude that if you know how to count with your ten fingers, you know how to use the system (sort of, at least the zone placement part). I am sure you can count with your ten fingers during pre-school, am I right? This is what I meant, bro!

 

[ricohflex]

Time out, guys.
Take a break and enjoy football.
Cool off period.

 

[photobum]

Time out, guys.
Take a break and enjoy football.
Cool off period.

Football? What is that????

Oh.... A sphere with Zone II and Zone VIII patches.

A few guys in Zone IV and Zone VI skin tones kicking it on a Zone V field.

 

[singscott]

Football? What is that????

Oh.... A sphere with Zone II and Zone VIII patches.

A few guys in Zone IV and Zone VI skin tones kicking it on a Zone V field.

Wow a true zonie speaking :bsmilie: