Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Zone System for Digital Photography  (Read 19164 times)
Anon E. Mouse
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 197


WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 20, 2005, 05:17:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Anon E Mouse, I doubt that any sensor manufacturer consulted 'the negative' before designing.

No, but they do design in reference to sensor response which is further changed by image processing at the time of capture. So there is no real difference between film and digital sensitometry in this regards.

Quote
BTW, at the start of this forum, you used to be able to post anonymously, but MR quite rightly decided that contributors should not be anonymised. I would much rather discuss things with someone who is prepared to be recognised.

And how would you do that? Even if I gave a name, I would still be anonymous. I don't know if "drew" is really your name. (Do you think "Digitaldog" is a real name?) Nor does does your name tell me anything about you. So regardless of the handle you choose, you are anonymous.

Then again, I have had nasty experiences on internet forums. I have already been personally insulted on this one. I would rather keep the conversation on the point of this forum, photography, rather than on personal disclosures.
Logged
tshort
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43



« Reply #21 on: November 20, 2005, 07:43:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jonathan Wienke,Aug 19 2005, 04:45 PM
The Zone system as originally conceived is not exactly applicable to digital imaging. Exposure with digital should be done as described in http://www.visual-vacations.com/Photogr....ies.htm to achieve the lowest noise and greatest dynamic range.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=26138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/]

That's good info, too - have read it and re-read it.  Still getting myself used to the "expose to the right" idea, but am getting good results when I follow it.  OTOH, I still like to use my light meter, to figure out what the brightness range is of my subject, and to calibrate my eye to be able to intuitively understand how far into the shadows my 20D will be able to see.
Logged

-T
Wisconsin
pobrien3
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 320


« Reply #22 on: November 21, 2005, 12:14:08 AM »
ReplyReply

The components of the zone system which are appropriate to visualisation and determination of exposure are just as valid to me as they ever were. True, I no longer need to make exposure judgements based on how I will develop a negative, but I make them bearing in mind how I will post-process.  I also think that as a framework for visualising relative exposure values in the scene it still has value, remembering that the camera meter (grossly over-simplifying the sophisticated technology here) will place exposure on zone V.

That said, I think the sainted Adams would have loved the RGB histogram - I know I do. For me it's the single most valuable aid to picture taking that has been introduced in the last 20 years. I never liked Polaroid backs - they gave only a rough guide to lighting at best, and were poorly representative of how the film / transparency would be exposed.

A fundamental tenet of the zone system is that you determine exposure bearing in mind how you will develop the negative. This is still very true, modified for the characteristics of the sensor and how you will post-process the RAW - exposing to the right to preserve shadow values / lower noise is an application of that, as is taking mutliple shots for blending.

As a rule of thumb I still spot meter off a caucasian face and dial in +2/3 exposure comp for portraits!
« Last Edit: November 21, 2005, 12:16:01 AM by pobrien3 » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5121


« Reply #23 on: November 21, 2005, 11:48:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As a rule of thumb I still spot meter off a caucasian face and dial in +2/3 exposure comp for portraits!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51841\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I use the palm of my hand as a "30% gray card" Doesn't every serious photographer know the reflectance of their palms for the sake of incident light metering?!
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 23, 2005, 12:09:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I use the palm of my hand as a "30% gray card" Doesn't every serious photographer know the reflectance of their palms for the sake of incident light metering?!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51870\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That may work well in rural North Dakota where >99% of the population is white, but in places like California where multiple races are common, and ethnically mixed people (white + hispanic, black + asian, etc) are also very common, metering off skin tones can give you an exposure variation >2 stops. Use a gray card, or better yet, learn how to read and interpret a histogram, and you'll be much better off no matter what your subject's ethnic background might be.
Logged

BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5121


« Reply #25 on: November 23, 2005, 12:22:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Jonathan,

   I explicitly mentioned calibrating for one's own palms! (By the way, what color are most palms of African ancestry? Not black.)
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #26 on: November 24, 2005, 10:52:36 AM »
ReplyReply

That is still worthless when the photographer is not in the same light as the subject. You're far better off learning how to read a histogram and understand its relationship to the underlying RAW data. That will give you the ability to understand where your exposure is and and how you need to adjust it in any shooting situation to accomplish your creative intent.
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad