zone system according to roelfsema

gertfritsche · 2008-11-24T15:55:41+00:00

Liebe Leute, als Neueinsteiger in die SW-Fotografie (bin zu einem focomat 2c gekommen wie die Jungfrau zum Kind, und dachte, die Gelegenheit sei günstig),...

gertfritsche

Dear all, As a newcomer to SW photography (I’ve ended up with a Focomat 2C quite by chance, and thought it was a good opportunity), I’ve read Roelfsema’s zone system. It seems quite logical to me and, for many things that make the Adams system seem difficult for 35mm at least, he proposes solutions, so I thought I’d give it a go. I hope I’m not stirring things up here; the zone system as a topic does seem to veer into the ideological quite often. Hence the specific question: Is there anyone who works according to this (Roelfsema) system (Adams doesn’t interest me), and has experience with Adox CHS films (I’m open to all three sensitivity grades), and can you achieve all five development schemes (E2, E1, N, C1, C2) with these? I’d like to work with these films if they deliver decent results for me, for both 35mm and medium format. And if possible, with one of the AdOX developers as well. I’m asking because the sample tables in the book are, of course, 15 years old and naturally do not cover AdOX or efke materials. And if it doesn’t work with AdOX films, or only to a limited extent, I’d be open to alternatives too. In the meantime, many thanks Gert (in case it’s of interest: I shoot with various Canon cameras and a Kiev 60, the enlarger is a Leitz Focomat 2c, I’ll be measuring exposure and density with a Gossen Labosix Digital and I bought a Jobo CPE2 processor at auction yesterday)

EJG

Hello, I had a look in Roelfsema. It lists films that are still commonly used today, such as FP 4 and HP 5 as classics, or the TMAX along with development recommendations. This allows you to gain experience with the process for 35mm/roll film and then apply that knowledge to other films such as ADOX. In my opinion, the zone system is difficult to apply to 35mm or roll film, unlike sheet film, due to the lack of corresponding information such as exposure and development time. Roelfsema suggests cutting the roll film in complete darkness. Well, who would put themselves through that? Kind regards, ejg

gertfritsche

Hi ejg, Thanks for your reply. How to develop the negative film seems to be the main problem for many people. Now that my brothers have switched completely to digital, I have a whole fleet of Canon cameras at my disposal (FTB, EF, AT-1, A1, T70 (2 of them)). So the possibility of having a suitable, self-loaded film for every situation is certainly there (whether that’s practical, I’ll have to see, but at least I have the option. And for the E2 speed, there’s still the Kiev 60, as that speed can be achieved with roll film. As you can see, this isn’t about family gatherings with loads of snapshots; it’s fine if the ‘black-and-white project’ takes its time. I’ve also decided to start with one of the usual suspects, the apparent favourite, Perceptol, simply to get into a bit of a routine. That’s probably how it’ll kick off. The fact is, though, that whilst reading the book (still as a layman, or rather without any black-and-white experience), I found Roelfsema’s approach very convincing, and I believe I really want to tackle this from the ground up. I’m more of a ‘read-the-instructions’ sort of person and can keep myself very busy with preparations, if they lead to the goal, in a sort of ‘anticipation...’ sort of way. On the other hand, I’m not keen on reinventing the wheel either; that is, if someone can explain to me in a way I can understand that I don’t need to start with ADOX films, then I don’t have to, because really I just want to take pictures. But if there’s already a company flying the flag with such a niche product, I’m the last person not to give it a go. Let’s see what the films are like (and the photos, which I want to enlarge over the New Year). Anyway, many thanks for the reply and I’m sure I’ll pop up here on the forum with a question or two from time to time, perhaps even with a reasonably decent photo at some point. Kind regards, Gert Fritsche PS: The number of Roelfsema users really does seem to be quite limited.

Gerd

As a newcomer to software photography

I’m not entirely sure whether you should start with such specialised techniques straight away. It would certainly help if you first got a feel for what is actually achievable with conventional development and where the difficulties begin that then lead to such technical challenges. But you can only get a feel for it through practice. And the simpler the task, the more successful your practice will be.

PS: The number of Roelfsema practitioners does indeed seem to be quite limited

There must be reasons for this. One of them is certainly that the need for a zone system is less today. With standard contrast-reversal paper (which didn’t exist during the development of the zone system) and skilful darkroom work, a great deal can be achieved in post-processing – without having to cut the film in the darkroom. Another reason could be that, for many photographers, it doesn’t seem worthwhile to aim for the very best quality using the complex zone system, only to then work in the darkroom. From this perspective, the effort is only worthwhile once the print reaches a certain size, which in turn requires a certain negative size. Gerd This was not a plea against the Zone System, but rather a plea not to strive for master status before the journeyman’s examination, or even before the apprenticeship begins.

Wolfgg

Hi Fritschie! A word of advice: start small. Learn, with a clear head, how to achieve exposure and develop a film according to N and only according to N. You first need to learn how to determine (i.e. measure) whether the film has been correctly exposed and developed. There are plenty of guides on this online (keywords: densitometry, sensitometry), e.g. here: http://www.schwarzweiss-magazin.de/swmag_frame_kurse.htm Only once you’ve got this step right will the next steps make sense. Regards, Wolfgang

gertfritsche

Dear all, Thanks for the replies. Let me say straight away: I’m not trying to come across as an expert here. And I’m actually in the process of exposing various films in a conventional way and then conducting their development as well. Just to get to grips with things like: loading a Jobo canister without completely ruining the images, mixing the developer, etc. I’ve been trying to find out more online for weeks, and I’ve also bought ‘Das Praxisbuch Schwarz-Weiß-Labor’ (The Practical Guide to Black-and-White Darkroom Work). To be honest, I found ‘Roelfsema’ to be the book where everything was described in the most understandable way for me. And since I quite like having at least a vague idea of what I’m doing, I’ve tried to get my head around it, or at least given it a go. @wolfgg The exposure for ‘N’ is where it all starts. What is N? That varies quite a bit depending on the film/developer combination, if I’ve got it right. (At the moment I’m just shooting according to the manufacturer’s instructions, and simply pretending that’s all N) Thanks for the tip about the black-and-white magazine; I’ve already downloaded everything relevant and ploughed through it. @gerd I think I mentioned that I’m trying to avoid having to cut the film up. I’ve got a film loader to hand. It’s also clear to me that 35mm isn’t the be-all and end-all when it comes to achievable formats, but I thought that a decent negative is actually all the more important. And if you then also have the many possibilities during enlargement, that doesn’t do any harm at all, in my view. To stick with the metaphor: I don’t really feel as though I’m on a training course. It feels more like an internship. And with a certain amount of impatience, I’m waiting for the bits that still need to be sorted out, and I’m looking forward to getting started. I still don’t know to what extent anyone has experience with the Adox/ADOX combinations. Thanks again for your tips Gert Fritsche

Wolfgg

Hi Fritschie, N stands for ‘Normal’. In terms of exposure, this refers to a standard lighting situation, such as a landscape that is slightly fogged (i.e. the sun is visible, but not as harsh as after a cold front has passed). The light meter then indicates a difference of 6 f-stops between the darkest area that should still show detail and the brightest area that should also still show detail. Together with the featureless areas of pure black and pure white (e.g. the sun), this gives a difference of 8 stops, resulting in the 9 zones 1 to 9 for N. Exposure and development at N now means exposing and developing the film in such a way that Zone 1 on the film produces a density of 0.1 above the fog, and Zone 9 produces a density of 1.5 above the fog. You then have a negative of the best possible quality, which matches the Special gradient paper exactly. Why Special paper gradient? Because only this gradient and Normal paper gradient deliver the best image quality (maximum tonal range and rich blacks), and some subjects need to be enlarged slightly more than planned, meaning they only really come into their own on Normal paper gradient. That is why it makes sense to always develop the film for Special paper gradient. You must first master this standard procedure to the point where you can do it in your sleep before it makes sense to consider N-1, N+1, etc. For Efke 25 (hopefully ADOX 25 is still the same), I can offer the following guidelines for N: Exposure as for 15 DIN Development: Rodinal 1+50 for 9 minutes at 20°C, tilting continuously for the first minute, then touching the canister every 60 seconds and tilting it twice. Regards, Wolfgang

gertfritsche

Dear Wolfgang, Many thanks for the pointers; the ADOX 25 film had been on my mind too. Once I get started – hopefully between Christmas and New Year – I’ll start by testing the film. I’m really looking forward to the density measurements; the Labosix should be able to handle that. Hopefully I will too. The procedure actually seems to me to correspond essentially to Roelfsema’s; he also starts with the paper to determine the exposure range, and then continues with the film. The tip about using special and standard paper seems very logical to me; that will become clear in due course. And I’m very grateful to you for the guidelines regarding the film; I’d also thought of Rodinal, not least because of the small pack sizes, just to start with. Is Calbe 09, or whatever it’s called at ADOX these days, very different from today’s Rodinal? At least the origins are supposed to be the same. Thanks again. I’m off out to take some photos tomorrow; I need to check whether the film speed on the Kiev is more or less on the mark. The films will then have to be developed by the local photo shop, and then I’ll have something to keep me going for fun until I’ve measured the films. Hopefully the subjects will be in the N range. Cheers Gert

Wolfgg

Hi Gert, According to everything posted online and here on the forum, R09 needs to be diluted at a ratio of 1:40 to work with ADOX 25 in the same way as Rodinal at 1:50; see, for example, here: http://www.f295.org/Pinholeforum/forum/Bla...b/m-1147033036/ The best approach is to carry out your own test, as this allows you to calibrate your own workflow, including your wrist ;) So simply sacrifice six shots on 35mm film and expose zones 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11. How? Place a sheet of white paper on the film, expose it to daylight, and measure the exposure (the light meter always displays values that should result in Zone 5 on film!), Underexpose Zone 1 by 4 stops, underexpose Zone 3 by 2 stops, apply overexposure to Zone 7 by 2 stops, and so on. Then, after development, measure the density; you’ll quickly see where the density is 0.1 above the fog (should be overexposed Zone 1), and where it is 1.5 above the fog (which should be Zone 9). If there are fewer than 8 zones’ difference between them (= 8 stops), the development time was too long. If the density 0.1 above the fog line is not on Zone 1 but, for example, exactly between Zone 1 and 2, then the exposure was 1/2 stop too short, etc. Once everything is correct after making the appropriate adjustments to exposure and/or development, you will know exactly how much light your film needs in your camera and with your development process to produce an initial usable density, and the maximum amount of light you can subject it to whilst still being able to see details in the highlights on Special paper. Regards, Wolfgang

gertfritsche

Hi Wolfgang, I was having a browse through the catalogue again yesterday and read somewhere that ADOX wants to change the R09 so that, like Rodinal, you can use a 1:50 dilution. As I’m not planning to order until soon, I’ll need to read the package leaflet to see which version is currently available. And since the whole thing starts with testing anyway, I’ll follow your tips and calibrate the films, the enlarger, the Jobo processor (and myself). At the same time, though, I’ll simply make contact prints of all the fully developed black-and-white films from the old days that I have lying around here, and see what density levels I can measure and what prints are possible. Thanks for now, Gert PS: Yesterday, my father, who is over ninety, handed me another developed film from his collection, probably family photos. The film is ADOX, so we’ll see. Funny, considering I’d never even heard of ADOX until three months ago.