Zone Ruler

A

ammasaah

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5
Edit My Images
No
Hi,
Please can someone explain this to me simplistically? Also, is it important to know in the digital age?
Thank you.
 
From Wiki...

"The Zone System is a photographic technique for determining optimal film exposure and development, formulated by Ansel Adams and Fred Archer.[1] Adams described how the Zone System as "[...] not an invention of mine; it is a codification of the principles of sensitometry, worked out by Fred Archer and myself at the Art Center School in Los Angeles, around 1939-40."[2]

The technique is based on the late 19th century sensitometry studies of Hurter and Driffield. The Zone System provides photographers with a systematic method of precisely defining the relationship between the way they visualize the photographic subject and the final results. Although it originated with black-and-white sheet film, the Zone System is also applicable to roll film, both black-and-white and color, negative and reversal, and to digital photography."

I read that much and then my brain wondered.

From Luminous landscape...

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/zone_system.shtml

"Ansel Adams developed the zone system to cope with this situation. His technique was to carefully study a scene, visualize the final print, then determine the correspondence between portions of the scene and tones in the print. He would then meter, expose and develop the negative accordingly. His basic rule was,

"Expose for the shadows; develop for the highlights." "

I don't think I'd come anywhere close to that with my digital cameras.
 
Last edited:
If you mean the Zone System, it only fully applies to shooting negative film, each shot processed individually, and then printed appropriately. Ansel Adams is the inventor (monochrome landscape legend) and if you look at his magnifiscent prints you can see how the technique basically manipulates and optimises tones in the subject so that the maximum range is reproduced in the print. They often have a certain HDR look to them.

The Zone System is not difficult, once you understand the basic principles of exposure, and AA's methods were widely followed - or at least the key aspects of them. It doesn't translate well to digital though, other than an understanding of subject tone values, and in digital terms that's represented by the histogram.

As far as optimising digital exposure levels is concerned, Expose-To-The-Right technique is the modern equivalent (ETTR - to the right of the histogram) with a bit of HDR thrown in. There are some underlying similarities to the Zone System - an appreciation of tones, dynamic range, and how to set optimum exposure as opposed to strictly correct exposure - but that's about it.
 
HoppyUK said:
As far as optimising digital exposure levels is concerned, Expose-To-The-Right technique is the modern equivalent (ETTR - to the right of the histogram) with a bit of HDR thrown in. There are some underlying similarities to the Zone System - an appreciation of tones, dynamic range, and how to set optimum exposure as opposed to strictly correct exposure - but that's about it.
Click to expand...

That's how I tend to use my G1 if at all possible but...

I read an article some time ago and I can't remember where... but it was on a reputable site... and they said that ETTR isn't the way to optimise DR when using some modern cameras. Design having moved on. Or something.
 
woof woof said:
That's how I tend to use my G1 if at all possible but...

I read an article some time ago and I can't remember where... but it was on a reputable site... and they said that ETTR isn't the way to optimise DR when using some modern cameras. Design having moved on. Or something.
Click to expand...

Yes, I also use basic ETTR technique all the time - basically being guided by blinkies activity rather than the exposure meter, or at least something between the two. Kinda quick 'n' dirty ETTR :D

The principle behind ETTR will always stand, but it could well be that as technology develops and sensor/processing engine improvements expand dynamic range, it will become less beneficial.

As things stand now, ETTR doesn't benefit all subjects and the flipside is that you end up over-exposing everything (which is fine, if you know where to draw the line) but that often means the shutter speed gets pushed lower than ideal.

The main benefit of ETTR is enhanced shadows - better tone separation, less noise, cleaner colours - and that works really well with say landscapes with darker foliage etc. But a waste of time for a high-key portrait.
 
As far as I remember the article said that it used to be that the greatest DR was to be had over at the right hand side and ETTR therefore was a real advantage. Their thrust was that sensor design has moved on and that's no longer the case.

I wish I could remember where I read it but all I can remember is that it was on one of the usual suspects sites.

Not that my cameras are cutting edge, they aren't, and regardless of any finite advantage or not I think I'll carry on until I see a disadvantage other than slowing the shutter speed. With a CSC it's easy as you can have an in view histogram and I can ETTR if possible and get a better first time keeper rate in difficult lighting with my G1 than I can get with my superior 5D.
 
woof woof said:
As far as I remember the article said that it used to be that the greatest DR was to be had over at the right hand side and ETTR therefore was a real advantage. Their thrust was that sensor design has moved on and that's no longer the case.

I wish I could remember where I read it but all I can remember is that it was on one of the usual suspects sites.

Not that my cameras are cutting edge, they aren't, and regardless of any finite advantage or not I think I'll carry on until I see a disadvantage other than slowing the shutter speed. With a CSC it's easy as you can have an in view histogram and I can ETTR if possible and get a better first time keeper rate in difficult lighting with my G1 than I can get with my superior 5D.
Click to expand...

Not the greatest dynamic range to the right of the histogram, that's a contradiction, but a load more data recorded on the right and that cannot change. Eg, if the dynamic range runs from 1-256, that's a difference of eight stops (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256) from dark to bright. If you draw a line for mid-grey somewhere between 16 and 32, in round numbers there will be at least ten times more data recorded on the right.

My point, and perhaps the point being made in the article you refer to, is that by using ETTR and adding maybe two stops more exposure (often possible) the lower end values of 2 and 4 etc become 8 and 16 - quadrupling the amount of data captured. This makes a big and visible difference to signal-to-noise ratio in the shadows with attendant benefits, whereas packing yet more data to the right where there is already very low noise, has little or no visible advantage.

Perhaps ETTR would be better named PUSFTL - Pull Up Shadows From The Left :D but as technology improves these upsides will become eroded.

Getting back on topic, the basic technique behind the Zone System, in very broadest principle, is to expose for the shadows and then hold back the highlights in development. ETTR works differently, but end the result is often similar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top