Re: [Leica] zones

[Ted Grant <tedgrant@islandnet.com>]

Rod Fleming wrote:

>Obviously too much Christmas trifle then, Ted, or you'd have noticed that in
>the post you refer to I wrote:
>
>"The fact is that you can indeed use the extended
>scale that the full Zone system allows, but really it is only practical on a
>view camera using sheet film">>>>>>


Hi Rod,
OOPS! Sorry, I guess I missed that line. At least we're together on it.

<<Ted also wrote
>>It's never been my thing to be involved with it, <<<<<<

Rod replied:
>Does not matter how good or how experienced you are, there's always room to
>learn some more.>>>>>

Well that's true, I've always said with photography "there is always
something more to learn!"  Anyone thinking they know it all better quit and
go blow in the wind!

<<<<I kinda dislike the suggestion that I'm a "rock" photographer BTW.>>>>

Now don't take offence lad, I always make those kinds of remarks with
affection!:) Simply because I've shot rocks, (no ferns) and peeling paint
myself!:) Oh yeah and old wooden barn wood from the shadow side for
texture.;)

<<<<Yes I do photograph rocks and trees (usually on 5x4) but it doesn't
pay; most of my money comes from photojournalism>>>>>

I never could figure out how a guy could make a living from rocks and
ferns, other than the big AA and few others of his type. Besides, my
problem is I never had the patience to sit still long enough to make the
images.

>I will make the point again; the Zone System is a teaching aid, not a rule
>to be slavishly followed in all situations. And "Expose for the shadows and
>develop for the highlights" has been around longer than the Zone System.>>>>

<<<<What I'm talking about is training the eye to see light and to respond
to it. I'm talking about "previsualizing"- just a  fancy term for having
some idea of what your image will finally look like at the moment when you
hit the tit!>>>>>>>

Well training the eye to see the light is something I totally agree with
simply because "light is the success of any photograph!"

I think I've been blessed with the ability to see and appreciate light as a
natural gift as I don't work at it, it just comes naturally without
thought. However, I've never previsualized anything in my 50 year career, I
realise with static objects one can do that, but all the documentaries I
ever did, it never crossed my mind to "pre-visualize" other than if it were
a sports picture and I was trying to archive blur effect with slow shutter
speeds and moving athletes.

<<<< While I was in the darkroom I had to print the work of some of the
finest photographers I have ever known - but I'll tell you something, Ted-
those who knew something about sensitometry produced negs that were a damn
sight easier to
>print! (Oh, they didn't call it sensitometry, they called it "knowing the
>light" , but it came to the same thing.)>>>>>

I guess I kinda fit in their category, as folks who've seen my prints,
exhibitions or books, very nearly always ask, "Do you use the zone system
for exposure?" At which time I almost gag! ;)  However, I guess I've done
something like a zone these many years without even knowing I was doing it.

>Hell, anything that can help get rid of the universal fill-flash has to be a
>good thing!>>>>>>>

AMEN and good on you with that! I still avoid it at all costs! :) Certainly
on an M6, I just can't imagine using flash! OOPS! Twinkie light!:)

regards,
ted

Ted Grant
This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler.
http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant