And How it Can Change Your Life in 15 Minutes.
By Gavin Seim (updated 12/10/11).
This may be the most valuable piece I’ve ever written on photography. Because no matter what you photograph, once you see and use Zones you never see the same again and you’re well on your way to mastering light. In the last year, I’ve started working with 4×5 film and digital side by side. I’ve explored deeper exercises in tonal control, “truly” learned to visualize, and implemented key parts of the Zone System that was developed by Ansel Adams and Fred Archer, both in my film and my digital work, in color and black and white.
The idea of visualizing and using Zones is not promoted heavily today. It seems much of the industry, including many of its educators, arrived at digital and decided that the past 150 years of photographic knowledge were somewhat irrelevant. Or maybe it’s that many photographers never understood Zones to begin with. So what I’m about to show you is not taught much, but understanding it WILL change your photography forever. I’m not kidding; once you grasp this, you’ll never see light the same way again. And I hope you’ll share it with others.
Sunsets Hidden Falls. Yosemite, 2010 - A general look at where I placed the scene elements in relation to the Zones. Each arrow leads to what I see as the zone on the scale.
I’m going to stay simple because these concepts are essentially simple. I have not come up with a new digital based zone system, a stripped down version, or an article full of nerdy equations, white papers, or complex systems. This is not hard, and you can start putting it to use TODAY for film or digital. Since most of us are in the digital world, I’ll focus on that. I’m going to show you how to use the core of the Zone System to make you a vastly better photographer. I’ve also brought along some examples for analyzing the Zones.
To those of you who already know this, kudos. But I challenge you to review and analyze whether you’re really using it, or just buzzing along in digital bliss and fixing things later. Excuse my bluntness, but this is happening to the best of us. We need to get back to basics, visualize, control tone, dynamic range, and image quality.
Originally, the Zone System was a complete approach that included everything from the initial exposure to the final print. Now we don’t use darkrooms much these days, so I’ll focus on the pivot point of the Zone System: the Zones themselves. That said, I would encourage you to study the whole process even if you don’t use film. It will help you gain a better understanding of light and photography. Not only that, but old books like Fred Picker’s Zone VI workshop, deal with it quickly and effectively and can often be had for mere pennies.
1. The Zone Scale.
The Zone Scale lies at the core of the Zone System. It consists of eleven squares that span from clipped black (Zone 0) to clipped white (Zone X). Each square represents a change of one stop. The first part of using Zones starts before you release the shutter. Truly visualizing your image is like nothing else. Once you master it, you see the image you plan to make, including your edits and refinements, in your mind before you ever take the photo. It changes everything about how you photograph and how refined the resulting images become.
Brilliantly simple, the Zone scale allows us to visualize all our light from complete black to complete white in one stop increments.
To begin, look at your scene. What’s outside your window right now? Visualize what zones in which the things around you fall. Then imagine you’re taking a photo. Imagine where the zones would be if the image came out exactly as you wanted. It does not have to be what you “see” but what you “visualize” for the finished image. How do YOU want to make it?
Think about what Zone levels on various objects in this scene would most complement your main subject as well as your supporting cast of elements. Sometimes it helps to begin by trying to visualize a scene in black and white, even if your final image is going to be color. Thinking in terms of only tones can be helpful, especially early on in the process.
2. Placing Those Zones.
OK, now you have a mental image for what your scene looks like. Let’s make it happen. You could choose any element as your basis. But let’s say you looked out your window, and the neighbor’s sports car is across the street. Set aside your annoyance for a moment that he has that sports car because he has a great paying job instead of being a photographer. Let’s say the car is a rich blue. Even though the color is dark, you imagined the car standing out and you placed it in Zone VI (6). Remember that just because something is dark, does not mean it always falls in a low zone. It’s all a question of the light and, more importantly, where you place it on the Zone Scale. And remember that while the Zones are shown as shades of grey, they represent tonal value. Color or black and white, Zones values work the same.
So for now lets meter that car using a spot meter, either spot mode on your camera, or a dedicated unit (I really like the Pentax Digital Spotmeter, as it reads in Exposure Values–very educational–and allows you to set Zones easily). You’re spot metering for the specific area you’re visualizing. Now there are some things to know about meters and we’ll talk more about them later. For now, let’s keep it simple and use that spot meter reading.
Say the meter tells us the blue of the awesome car is 1/200 at ISO100 and f8. Great, now here’s the catch. METERS METER TO MIDDLE GRAY (Zone V). Look at it on the scale above, then let me say it again: METERS READ BASED ON ZONE V. This means that your meter, in particularly a reflective meter like the one in your camera, is not really telling you what the best exposure is (*more on meters below). I know this may be surprising, but in general a meter is simply telling you what exposure will place the metered object at middle gray, Zone V. Not what is actually a good exposure. If you already know this then big props. Most people have no idea.
How can this be? I mean you’ve been working under the assumption that your meter is always right. Well, it probably is, at Zone V. So unless you want your subject middle grey, you need to compensate. We’ll get to that soon. Now if you’re in the default Averaging type mode of many modern cameras, it’s essentially reading from various parts of the scene and averaging a guess at proper overall exposure. This is a nice tool, but it’s often misguided and takes the control out of our hands. Yes, that’s probably why those lovely faces in your portraits come out too dark. So we’ll stick with spot mode for now.
What all this means is incredibly powerful. The meter is still brilliant. Knowing that it gives you a Zone V reading for the metered section of the scene, all you have to do is decide which Zone an element should fall in, then compensate accordingly. Remember that each Zone is one stop. The reflected meter gives you the exposure at Zone V. Let’s say you want the car at Zone VI (6). All you have to do is expose one stop above what your meter says, and that car will be placed at zone VI. It really is that simple. Let’s say in another scene you metered a dark section of foliage and imagined it at Zone III. Well, all you have to do is spot meter, then drop down 2 stops lower. Violà, you placed it at Zone III.
*Regarding meters (updated 11/15): Meters can vary and you need to know your tools so lets clarify them bit. A spot, or in camera meter looks at your subject and reads based on “reflected light” (just as you and your camera see it). An incident meter (the kind you hold in front of your subject), reads the light being cast on it thru it’s translucent grey sphere.
Incident meters cannot see the reflectiveness of the subject (think snow vs. a dark red curtain). Now the idea is that an incident meter is reading the oncoming light and effectively placing it it’s sphere at Zone V (similar to if you spot metered on a grey card). Because of that, other tones “should” follow accurately (what you see is what you get). That said, it’s not quite that simple. While it should be close, certain tones may not render exactly as expected because while the incident meter has it’s standard (the sphere) to read from, it still can’t “see” the subject being metered.
So while both meters are effectively metering based on Zone V, an incident meter is a bit less specific in my view, because it’s only reading that oncoming light and you still may need to account for the reflectiveness of your subject. Some might argue that because incident ideally gives you what you see, that we don’t need the Zones. I beg to differ. In many non studio or close up situations, incident readings are not possible. Even when they are, what you see is not always what you want. Based on a natural incident reading that car may fall at Zone V, but you might still want to place it up to zone VI to achieve the visualization you want and properly convey your feeling of the scene.
This does not mean you can’t use incident readings in cooperation with the Zone approach. Just understand that incident and reflective read a bit differently. As a general a rule I would say that when you meter with incident, assume it’s reading is close to what you see. You can then compensate the Zones to place elements anywhere desired. If you like it as is that’s fine, but seeing your Zones will still help you plan a better image.
Reflective meters. I prefer the more absolute nature of the reflected reading (generally spot). One, because even if you don’t have a separate meter, your in camera meter will work the same. But more importantly, because a spot meter always gives you a fixed point to start from. It effectively places whatever object you point it at in Zone V. Then you compensate to place that object in whichever Zone you want. The reflected reading is absolute. For people who don’t understand their zones, everything they meter turns grey. But for those of us that use the Zones we’re discussing, it’s amazingly powerful and makes visualizing and seeing light a simple thing. And yes, you can spot flash meter with some meters, though probably not with your in-camera meter.
So whichever meter you use, with natural light or flash, you can apply the Zone techniques with great success. Just understand how your meter reads light. Also bear in mind that meters can vary slightly. For example your meter may not read exactly at the 18% gray reflectance standard that Zone V is based on. We’re not talking much difference, so don’t worry about it too much now, but you want to learn how “your” meter works and as you delve deeper you may want to nail down your calibration.
Morgan's Song, Commissioned Portrait, 2011 - In a portrait, I generally want the subject's face in Zone 6-7. It varies, of course, with skin, highlights, and shadows. I placed her dress (by burning) no lighter than the face to avoid competition, continuing the reducing approach with other elements in the scene. Everything needs to lead in to my subject. Otherwise, it does not belong there.
3. The Other Zones.
OK, great, you say. Now I can place any element in any Zone I want. The problem is that every other element of the scene is also exposed based on that part. Some might be lighter or darker than what I visualize.
Aha! I might say. This is what makes photography an art and a science. We should consider what Zones the low and high values will fall into as well. You’ve planned the exposure you want for your main subject. You just have to carry it through. In the days of film, the Zone System had lots of other relevant pieces based around the Zones. Those pertained to the way you processed the film, dynamic range, how you printed, and more. We just have to think of it terms of the medium being used. For most, that’s digital. Even when I use large format, I scan to digital for my final processing.
So let’s consider this. Our car is placed at Zone VI (6). But because of that, the bright sky might have come up Zone IV (9). That’s almost white. Yet you want a nice rich sky blue around Zone VII (7). You have a visualization. How can you make it happen? Clearly, we have to darken that sky while maintaining our subject. We could do this in camera, placing the sky where we want it with the main exposure, while keeping the subject at it’s chosen Zone using extra light; a reflector, flash etc. This approach is very applicable to portraits and commercial work, though it may not always be the look you want. Another method would be adjusting in post, using a burn (darken) brush, or a gradient to bring down the tonal value of that sky. Even when I use a flash I’ll often burn or dodge to control tones on a very specific level. Either way, since we know exactly what we’re visualizing, we can easily answer questions to make it happen perfectly.
For now lets talk about the burn and dodge approach since it addresses some important issues. We know the car is placed Zone VI. The question is, is the camera capturing the information we need in other areas? Digital is improving, but it still has less range than film did. If the sky is clipping to white in the histogram, we probably need a darker frame. This isn’t a problem; make a separate exposure with the sky in the Zone you want. Back in the digital darkroom, you could blend those. Maybe with HDR software and tone mapping, or more likely just with a simple layer blend in PS, mix the rich sky into the scene while retaining our subject at its given Zone.
Still, maybe the camera has enough light range in one file. If you look at your histogram, and the highlights (right side) are not clipping, then you may have what you need. The same goes for the darks. Visualize your darkest areas. Is the image capturing enough information to place them where you want, using gradients, brushes, burning, dodging in post processing? These are questions I can’t answer, but it simple once you have a plan. You might even compensate your exposure a little to the right or left of what the meter says, making a file that has a completely non clipped histogram. Just remember your subject is the VIP. In my experience the less you have to adjust main subject exposure later, the more your light and image quality will sing. Plan where those Zones should be placed. Meter, then expose as you see fit and go to work on the finished product. Burn, dodge, blend layers, control tonal values and make your visualization happen. Not so unlike Ansel did in his darkroom.
- For more ideas on controlling the tonal values, and finishing your zones after the image is captured, read my extended article: 3 Core Elements of Controlling Tonal Value.
4. Lets Recap.
1. Look at your scene and see in terms of Zones. What light do you have?
2. Analyze your subject. What zone do you want it placed in? There are no limits.
3. Consider other elements. What zone should they be to best complement the subject?
4. Meter your subject and determine what it’s exposure would be at Zone V. It’s also good to meter other areas in the scene to better understand how might range you’re dealing with.
5. Adjust. The meter gave you Zone V (5). Now adjust your exposure compensation (EV) up or down to put the metered subject in the zone you chose. Remember that each step on the Zone Scale is simply one stop, or EV
6. Consider if the camera can capture enough range to place all objects in the zones you visualized. If not, take extra frames as needed. Note that this is one reason why cameras average by default. Sometimes by adjusting the exposure to a happy medium you can get everything you need. Just keep your main Zone in mind. Everything has a cost, and the closer your subject is to dead on, the better. Just do your adjustments with a plan, knowing how it will affect your image.
7. Capture your frame according to what you found by metering and visualizing. Wait, did we actually plan before making our image?Yikes! that’s new. Seriously though, don’t be afraid to make a few test exposures along the way. But don’t trust what’s on the LCD. Use your metering and histogram to determine if you’re getting what you’re visualizing.
8. Develop that image that was perfectly exposed according to your visualization. Edit, apply corrections, presets, burn, dodge, tone mapping, blend layers, and whatever you need to make it match what you visualized.
9. There really is no nine. You’ve done it. Now go make that really amazing print.
The Whispering Brook, WA, 2011 - I followed my visualization nearly exactly on this. Knowing what I wanted in the image before I ever captured it, I kept the busy elements very simple by controlling exposure and keeping the values low throughout. The water still maintains strong contrast however, even though there is no white clipping. This is due to how dark other elements in the scene are placed.
This is from the uncorrected RAW. I did pretty well placing the tonal values using my exposure. But the final above was much more than a desaturation. I came in using presets, channels, burn, dodge, etc., and finished the image to what I had seen in my mind before I released the shutter. I knew what I wanted, and that's what I got. I admit I'm not always this well organized, but when I truly visualize, not just my capture, but how it will look when it's finished, my work seems to take on a new quality.
5. Wrapping Up.
OK, this is simple, but it was a lot of stuff. If you’re feeling confused, read it again, because once you really start to grasp it, it will come quickly. If you think you understand but don’t see the value, read it again because you have not really grasped how powerful it is. If you think you use this instinctively and you already knew it, even though you don’t really, read it again. This is the single most valuable, yet simple, bit of photographic knowledge I have learned in my nearly 15 years of photography.
I know I’m being a bit snarky there, but it’s only because some people (often the so-called experts) turn their nose up at this as if they already knew it and it’s no longer relevant. If you really know and truly use every step already, than huge props to you, because you are among the few. But if you think it’s no big deal, it’s time get back to basics. Because this is no less relevant than it has ever been. In fact, it may be more so.
That’s all for now. This can go deeper so I encourage you to look into these concepts further, but for now just start exposing in Zones. Before long, you will never see light, or make photos, the same way again. I know, sometimes you’ll be on the move, and you won’t have time to spot meter and plan every frame. That’s why today’s automated tools can be really useful. But if you slow down (check out The 111 Photo Project) and end the mindset of letting gear think for you and put visualization, Zones, and tonal control into practice at every chance, it will start affecting all your images, even the ones you have to do lightning quickly.
I hope you’ve enjoyed this. Please +Like, share, and tell the world as you learn how powerful this can be. Remember, it will take a little time and practice. I suggest you demand of yourself to start seeing in Zones, visualizing and planning your images. It will work. I plan to keep refining this as I improve my own skills and find to better ways explain this often neglected piece of our craft that has changed the way I make images. I’ll also be discussing it during my tours and workshops.
Now go. Apply this. Because it works so dang well, it’s almost unbelievable. Good luck!
Gav
- For a bit broader view that looks at using these ideas in collaboration with good scene planning, processing and more, read my extended article: 5 Essential Keys of Perfect Photographs.
- Also peek at the Zone System wiki entry for more general info like descriptions of each Zone.
- Read books. Like Ansel Adams, The Negative for in depth Zone system studios.
- I also did nearly a whole podcast in light and Zones on Pro Photo Show.
- Discus beyond comments. Visit the forum thread for this article.
Andrew at Mission Bridge. Commissioned portrait, 2011 - I was using 4x5 film here. I focus heavily on of space in my portraits, but to show that environment I need to control it. The subject has to stay strong. I kept the elements darker, though few were black. And kept my subject dominant up around Zone IV.
This was on 4x5, and it came out as planned. But you see how the final development I did in LR/PS completed my visualization; by editing the supporting cast tones to where I wanted them and working with details, I kept the subject primary in this open scene. I finished the final above as a 40 inch print on canvas for the client.
When I read Adams’ books a few years ago, it changed my photographic life. I wish more people would realize the value of this. Thanks for promoting it! – D.
You’re so right Daniel. It’s actually a bit frustrating once you get, it because you realize what most everyone else is missing out on. It’s so beautifully simple and powerful. Keep spreading the word.
Nice article, but I think its a bit misleading. Why? Because we dont see in your article the before and after pictures. If we follow this advise, we will often overexpose a bit, means the whole picture will be much brighter on our LED screen. But your pictures are dark (post-processed). People would wonder how it comes that their pictures are kind of over exposed and yours are looking good. I guess that the raw file, exposed via zone system, would look not very nice. The only good exposure would be your main subject. So showing your (very bright) RAW file would help to understand that the RAW file is just the beginning.
I’m not sure what you mean Andreas. Perhaps you need to look it over again. There are a couple original file examples to illustrate how I post processed, as well as detailed discussion about that part of the process. I’m not sure why you would over-expose. The idea here is not whether you should go light or dark. It’s all about giving the photographer control. Once you understand what you have you can do whatever you like with it.
If you follow the steps, meter correctly and place your subject in the Zone you visualize, you should come out nearly dead on. At that point you can burn, dodge etc to bring other elements into the exact Zones you visualized. Also something we cover above. If I’m misunderstand something about your question please feel free to get in touch. I’m just trying to spread the word about this amazing approach to managing light. There’s nothing like it.
Gav
Gav, this is by far one of the most powerful and informative articles I have read in a long time. I have been dabbling with the zone system both in film and in recent years in digital photography. Your article clearly confirmed a lot of things that I needed to know in my continuing study on this topic. Thanks for taking the time to write and share your personal experiences and knowledge with the rest of us who are still in the quest to better our photography. Your article is greatly appreciated.
Jimmy
Thanks so much Jimmy. Keep working with it and spreading the word. The world of photography need to realize how essential this is. I hope you’ll join us on the PPS forums and share new discoveries about it… prophotoshow.net/forum… Gav
Hi there, sorry if my thoughts were a bit confusing. My English is not the best….
Well, what I wanted to say is that, when you suggest that the average metering of the camera would be “Zone 5″, then a person in the picture as the main subject would be mostly a bit underexposed. Correct?
So if you now ride the exposure compensation to bring your main subject to “Zone 6″, you start to dial in “+” via exposure compensation. But by doing so, you shift EVERYTHING to the brighter side. Not only the main subject but everything. And that makes everthing brighter. Grass is not anymore deep green, the sky might be overexposed etc. Am I correct? And when I go one step further, I would simply suggest to do a spot meter reading of your main subject and then you have the correct exposure anyway, without guessing via zone system. So I’m still wondering what is it all about. I just dont get it
You’re correct in how the exposure works, but you’re not understanding the system. Most certainly the rest of your exposure follows your primary exposure. That’s the case no matter how you photograph. The Zones just give the control to you. This is all dealt with step by step in the article. The beauty is that there is no guessing with the Zone system…
You decide what you want to meter and what zone it should fall in, compensating your exposure up or down in kind. But you also consider the other elements of the scene and how light/dark they will be. You now visualize, considering where the elements will fall on your exposure scale and also considering how you want the final image to look.
So when Ansel Adams went back to the darkroom, he had the exposure he wanted. Then he developed the image and lightened darkened etc in the darkroom to control other scene elements as needed, to maintain what he had visualized. It’s the same for us now, only for most we have Photoshop burn, dodge and other tools.
The system works like nothing else. Once you understand and are able to visualize and plan your images using the Zones, you will know what you’re getting before you ever release the shutter. Hope that helps. I suggest you keep reading. It could the the language barrier that’s making it it hard, but you’ll know you have it when you say “wow” and the lights come on. There’s nothing like it and you never see light the same again… Gav
Hi Gavin,
thanks for being so patient with me. But I afraid I just don’t understand the whole idea behind it. I guess “Zone system” does not work for me. As long I get the right exposure on my main subject, I’m happy. And I know that getting the right exposure on my main subject could under or overexpose the rest of the scene. I would call it then “this sky is overexposed”, whereas you would maybe call it “this is now Zone 1″.
Anyway, thanks a lot for your time and help!!
Andreas
You’re welcome to contact me directly to chat sometime Andreas.
I think part of the problem is that you’re still thinking in terms of what the camera/meter says is correct exposure. But once you understand zones, you understand that the meter has no idea what correct exposure is. Correct exposure is whatever YOU decide it should be, for the feeling you want in a given image. You expose the element you want, where you want it and the rest is processed as needed to fit your visualization.
It’s all about control. Lets say I have a brown grass in front of my lens. The meter simply places that at zone 5, or average. But I don’t want that. I want the grass light and vibrant That’s my visualization. But the sky is also light and and if I place the grass at zone 7, the sky will be at zone 9. I have the knowledge. Now I just have to plan. I could either use a filter for the sky to darken it, or as long as I’m not clipping, I could burn down that sky later while editing. The choice is mine because I know exactly what I’m getting.
We need to put out of our mind what a meter tells is is “proper” exposure, because it’s not actually telling us that. It’s only telling us what it see’s based on zone V, or middle grey. Understanding that, we can easily use the zone system to expose objects as we want them to look, rather than middle grey.
Don’t give up on it. It’s so powerful. Remember it’s simple at it’s core and if you apply it it will work every time… Gav
Thank you Gavin for this powerful information. I had just received a borrowed lens last night and was anxious to try it out. Read your article, perfect timing. So, I took my new knowledge and took photos of things in my house. The photos came out great. However, the most impact it had on me was not how well the photos looked in camera, but, how empowered I felt taking them. How much more control I have on my photos. And also justifing the money I spent on the light meter. Thank you so much.
Doesn’t it feel amazing to “know” what you’re doing with the light Dennis. Keep with it. It just gets better… Gav
Hi Gav,
nice introduction to the zone system with interesting information. Yes, it’s a great way to see and visualize light.
As you described it here, it allows the photographer to expose an image as (s)he wants to, so the picture taken looks like the image envisioned out of the box/camera. If that’s what you want, this is a viable approach.
However, there is a reason why the zone system isn’t referenced or taught as much with digital photography. There actually is an important difference between digital and analog photography which makes the zone system, as described and used here, less relevant today.
The reason lies in how digital imaging sensors process light and produce noise: If there’s a lot of light, the signal is stronger than the sensor’s own noise, and thus the information is recorded properly (good signal to noise ratio). When there’s less light, the signal is weaker and harder to distinguish from the sensor’s noise (bad signal to noise ratio).
You can easily see this when working with high ISO values. The noise is strongest in the darker areas whereas it’s much less of a problem in the lighter ones.
So, the brighter an exposure, the more information (and less noise) is recorded in your image. Of course, there’s also a limit there, and if the sensor’s dynamic range is exceeded, the brighter areas will burn out and result in a complete loss of information there.
Considering these technical limitations, the best exposure – the one where the most information and least noise is recorded – is the one where we get the brightest image without burned-out highlights (in relevant areas). Then this image can (and should – if it turned out brighter than desired by the photographer) be post-processed optimally.
You can easily achieve this kind of exposure by spot-metering the brightest, relevant part of your scene and dialing in positive exposure compensation until it’s at the brightest value which still doesn’t burn out. That value depends on your camera model so you have to find it out for yourself, but thanks to the blinking overexposure warning you’ll know when you’ve reached it or when you’ve gone too far.
When post-processing, you’d lower the exposure to achieve the look you envisioned. Then you can dodge and burn to your heart’s content, knowing that your capture included as much information as possible (with a single capture).
If you chose a different exposure, you’d have lost information: Any brighter exposure and your brightest areas would have burned out (since we already got them as close as possible to the limit), any darker exposure and you’d have sacrificed signal to noise. So this really is an objective optimum, not a subjective choice.
With this capture, you can get any other exposure you could envision through post-processing: You can lower exposure globally or by burning locally, and you can raise exposure globally or by dodging locally. You can selectively raise or lower highlights, midtones or shadows.
This exposure technique is called “Expose to the Right”, because the histogram will usually show that most information is in the right (brighter) half and less information in the left (darker) half.
If you’d like to combine exposing to the right with the zone system you described: Instead of placing your subject in any zone of your choosing, place the brightest part at zone IX. This gives you the optimum dynamic range and signal to noise ratio possible with a single exposure.
Well, that’s my humble attempt to explain this technique, and apparently quite a long comment. There’s much more and better information if you search for it online, even a Wikipedia article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_to_the_right – recommended further reading!
Kind regards
– Stefan Daniel Schwarz
Hey Stefan, well reasoned comments. Though I have to disagree in part. In my research and learning on all this I feel confident in saying that the reason the Zones are not used and taught much is because people simply don’t understand them. This is nothing new really. Even in the film days Zones were underused (I’ve asked the people that were active back then) they were never completely mainstream.
As for ETTR (Expose to the Right). It’s a good thing to understand, but it’s not really a system of exposure. The Zones are. I don’t find digital exposes all that differently (though it has less range of course) I’d say ETTR is a fair guideline for when you’re eon the run and wanting to capture all the range you can. Expose a bit light while making sure you don’t clip your highlights. But to me it pretty much ends there. The idea of overexposing for the sake of it is fundamentally flawed. It does not negate the Zones because if you understand and use Zones in exposure and processing you know “exactly” what you’re getting and you get exactly what you want. It’s trueI generally like to see an exposure that has no highlight clip and little or no black clip. Because of that I may vary for the absolute Zone value to give me the range I feel I need.
I consider extra information in a file for the sake of it of less value than nailing what you envision. The better the main subject is exposed, the better the image both in beauty and quality.
If you want to apply ETTR the Zone system does not become invalid. The “best exposure” is the one that makes your subject look as good as possible. I say expose dead on in most cases, but if you visualized and planned your scene, then gave another 1/2 stop for a bit extra in the shadows, you should be cool as long as you don’t clip the light. But even with that, the System if Zones is no less valid. Zones are a system for seeing and managing light and most people don’t use it because they don’t understand it or are not willing to discipline their light control on that level.
Thanks for getting me thinking. I like looking at all methods being used, though generally I find their principles can slide right in as weapons in the arsenal along the Zone system. Gav
Hello again!
I’m not trying to claim that the zone system should or even could be replaced by ETTR. I think seeing and using zones is still a very valuable skill to possess, and a great way to determine your final exposure. It’s just that I mean the exposure you have after post-processing, not necessarily the one you get directly by taking the picture.
I, too, don’t consider extra information in the file for the sake of it important. As you said, in the end, it’s all about the main subject being exposed as good as possible to achieve the greatest image beauty and quality. But I believe that using ETTR while taking the picture and then post-processing according to my artistic vision utilizing the zone system to get the desired look, maintains the greatest possible image quality, which in turn provides more leeway for postwork and thus potentially more beauty.
In the end, it’s up to everyone to make up their mind how they expose and post-process. I just wanted to mention ETTR since it can be used instead of or, to even greater benefit, together with your zone approach.
Personally, I don’t use ETTR all the time, because often there’s not enough time, so matrix metering is used and exposure compensation dialed in based on guessing and experience. For most cases, that’s just fine, but if you have the time and the image is important enough to warrant the extra effort, I’d use it to keep more options to post-process and maintain the greatest image quality.
By the way, after posting my comment, I started to look around some more and found a recent article on another blog which, to say the least, gets one thinking very much. I’m sure we all instinctively know the answer to the question how to expose a black cat sitting on coals or a white cat on snow. But considering the difference between film and digital in this case is really mind-blowing.
I don’t want to further derail the topic “Zone System” with ETTR discussions, especially with my long comments, but I really want to share a final link with you. It should get you thinking again, as it did for me, and I hope you’ll find it as insightful as I did: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/optimizing_exposure.shtml
Kind regards
– Stefan Daniel Schwarz
Good discussion Stefan, thanks for chiming in. I actually started a thread related to this article on the Pro Photo Show forums. I welcome deeper discussion so feel free to join us… http://prophotoshow.net/forum/index.php/topic,4376.0.html
You might even make your own thread about ETTR. There’s some debate about it in the industry and I think it bears discussion.
Gav
You did a good job!! Let me know a lot about zone system.
Hi,
Very very interesting article !
About the photograph “Morgan’s Song”, when you said that you burned her dress (in order that it is not lighter than …), how do you do Burn/Dodge in digital ?
Thanks!
Hey Jebb. This is something I cover in depth in my HDR Magic video workshop, but it’s very effective in digital. In essence you just work with the B&D tools in a program like Photoshop and others. The principal is the same as in the darkroom days, but with digital tools.