OK, been reading about this, and I get the theory and a bit of the practice, but my mind is asking that dreadful question: “why?”

If we take Nick’s woodland scene, he is saying that I should adjust the exposure so that it’s at 0 in the camera’s exposure meter. The grass is correctly exposed, and the trees are further pushed into shadow by this. and, yes, you get a good picture. I get that. It’s what I do when shooting on manual (which I have to admit is not very often).

What I don’t fully get is the reason to step down. At this point, I remember that we used to overdive or underdrive at uni film by telling the camera a different ISO number to what film was rated at. The reasons for this are hazy, but a have a feeling that it’s related. We can’t overdrive or underdrive a digital camera - tell it top use ISO200, and you get that sensitivity.

So, let’s take a scenario where I am taking a picture of an object in shadow. Using a modern camera, I would set the exposure on the camera to be at position 0. Back in the say, I would be shooting on a manual SLR with the film ISO and camera ISO settings out of kilter (I must email old photography tutor to ask for a reminder on that) That is properly exposed. But the Zone System tells me I should step down by one or two stops. I suppose I have to try this, but I am not sure that stepping down will be beneficial as the object in shadow would fail to be exposed satisfactorily.

On a separate, but connected note. If I shoot in RAW, and I correctly expose the object in shadow (ie it’s at position 0), could I use software like Aperture to “re zone” the picture and retain the image fidelity? I know this is seen as heresy by some (little sister included), but I do believe that what comes out of the camera is the start of a process, not the end of it.

I have to point out that I am probably using this system when I shoot manually, but have not had it explained in a formal way. I can get mightily confused when this happens, as I tend to start to think of what I am already doing as “wrong” rather than see it as added information.

I must experiment a more with my camera to see results.

Paul - the first thing to point out is that it is not telling you what you 'should' do at all. It's merely telling you how to achieve certain results.

The second thing to make clear is that you need to use spot metering to use the zone system effectively. When you mentioned the woodland scene, you omitted to mention that I took a reading from the sunlit patch of grass before setting the exposure - if I'f set the camera to 0 for the whole scene, the second picture would be the likely result.

In your film camera example, setting the camera's ISO out of line with the film rating is just another way of achieving the same effect. Telling the camera you're using ISO 400 with ISO 100 film will always underexpose by 2 stops, which is the same as telling the camera you're using ISO 100 and using a four times faster shutter speed that the camera suggests. Re-rating the film will effectively shift the correlation between camera meter and zone in the first diagram in my article, so that in the example above (ISO 400 with ISO 100 film) 0 would correspond to zone 3, not 5. It is precisely because you cannot re-rate a digital camera that you have to make these adjustments manually.

This is the part that I was getting confused with I think.

If you had a picture with a shaded area in it and you exposed to 0 according to the shaded region then the rest of the picture would be over exposed.

The zone system says that to correctly expose the picture you should set the exposure to be too dark (i.e. -2 or something) for the shaded area. That way the picture will be correctly exposed for the lighter areas.

sounds like something I need to try too? I dont even know how to activate it on D80

There's this concept known as "reading". Words flow past your eyes and your brain absorbs the information they give.

In other words, dig out your camera's user manual, assuming it was a printed one, or look it up on the PDF that came on the software CD.

You may find it enlightening. I do.

Pedantically speaking, your eyes move past the words, unless you're reading a ticker-tape.

Mark

I cheat - the Sony has the facility to take three pictures with either +/- 0.3Ev or 0.7Ev. However, the 40-zone metering system always seems to work pretty well.

Ah yes, bracketing. Mine can do that too, though I've never actually used it.

Mark

Ok - got a rather confusing reply from ex photography teacher. He gets enthusiastic, and words seem to flow faster than brain can order them. He can also get very technical - he’s been doing photography for decades.

Point 1 - over driving or under driving films is achieving pretty much as the zone system. He says to expose for the shadows, process for the highlights. He also seems to think that you can achieve some of this using RAW - I guess he sees RAW in the same light as printing from a negative.

Point 2 - more of an aside really - in the USA, digital photography is not seen a “fine” photography because of detail resolution - he says that this will change. Digital does not seem to meet the needs of a lot of the fine photography community there.

In essence, it seems that reading about the the Zone system is formalising and hopefully re-organising a lot of loosely floating information in my head. I can only think that experimentation is going to be the key for this, not a lot of theoretical chatter.

This is all very interesting, and hopefully helpful. I will have to extract the RAW files from the Barbican from Aperture and run them through the rather horrid software that Leica supplied to see what can be done there. I do wish Apple would catch up.

ive lost all my manuals

http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/noprint/D80_noprint.pdf

Mark

Page 52

*laugh*
Just how helpful are we.

Mark

very

My camera does not have spot metering so I won't be getting the best out of this when I try it out.