Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/04/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>On Thu, 18 Apr 1996, Jack Campin wrote: > > I haven't read Minor White's book: perhaps it is one of these >which contributes to the not so uncommon view that the Zone system is >technical, hard to understand, and requires precise metering of every >shot. It doesn't. It is really no more than a convenient conceptual >system and terminology for the way that film works and for diagnosing >exposure problems. It does adapt well to the kind of technical work that >Adams, White and used it for, but none of that is necessary - as Adams >himself insisted. Many people who street shoot understand the system and >use it to calibrate their film and print and, to some degree, to expose >their film. In that respect the only respect in which their practice >differs significantly from that of Cartier-Bresson and other pre-Zone >system street-shooters is that they have a terminology that makes it easy >for them to talk about what they are doing with their film. Delurking here. I've taught people photography. If you teach someone who knows *nothing* about photography, teaching the Zone System is a snap. You simply tell them how a light meter works, how to judge a scene, and when to over or underexpose. These students will never have an exposure problem in their lives. It's the ones who already "know photography" that can't believe the Zone System works. They always try to "second guess" and screw things up. Eric