How I Fixed My Awful Black & White Photography

[@L.Spencer]

"Shadows are the unsung hero of photography because they hide so much!" I love it!

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Glad you like it I think this is my new mantra!

[@sdegio70]

Highlight too, you can raise their luminosity to hide disturbing details.

[@frankc3834]

The best “system” is no system, and create an image with mood, design, and integrity.

[@delthomas-n4m]

Being a fan of black and white images, I’ve set up one of the picture profiles in my cameras as high contrast black and white so the image I see in the viewfinder and rear screen is the jpeg version of the image I’m taking. This makes it so much easier to create the image in camera. As I shoot raw images, when it’s transferred to Lightroom the image has all the colour data of the original scene so all I need to do is then apply a preset that I’ve created to return to a B&W image and I can manipulate it in whatever way I think necessary to arrive at a final image. I’ve found this method really useful in creating some images I’m really happy with.

[@CassioHungria85]

You can use a B&W profile to take pictures and them select IMPORT WITH CAMERA SETTINGS in Lightroom... So the image you see in library and develop modules in Lightroom are the same as que image you see in rear screen

[@kenh.5903]

the zone system was never meant, nor did adams ever proclaim, that you must have all of these tones in every print. It is simply applied sensitometry that gives you control and predictable results so that you can use the CRAFT to fully realize your vision, otherwise you only come up with happy accidents.

[@bencompson]

Exactly. People talk about the Zone System as if it were some sort of rigid rule that must be followed to capture all zones. People also say it no longer applies in the digital age. All of these misunderstand both the history of and concept of the Zone System. The history, and what makes it ground breaking, is that prior to it even most of the greats were just guessing about exposure. The ZS takes the guess work out. The concept is not about a fixed formula for every image. The zones were just the tools to achieve the concept, which was visualizing the end product, the print, and using fixed principles to make an exposure that allows you to make the print in the way you visualized it. And there is nothing about sophisticated metering, extended dynamic range with digital or digital printing that obviates the utility of the ZS. If anyone lets the ZS hinder their creativity that is the fault of the photographer not the concept of the ZS.

[@blueboy4244]

first..one needs to 'previsualize' the scene.. then meter the scene using a spot meter... and then after exposing the film - develop the film.. so the whole zone system is really set up for sheet film where you can push and pull development for each individual shot - if one is shooting roll film - one needs 3 to 5 separate film backs ..it just gets to be crazy... and for digital it doesn't really work at all..or it becomes pointless really

[@friendofarca6550]

@@blueboy4244 the zone system works only in theory even Adam’s himself was unable to apply it as designed.and it never played a roll outside a certain circle. The spectral response of a ligthmeter is different to film a core problem when you measure our colorful world.

[@andyl4565]

Good video that captures some of the most basic principles for better digital BW photos. One thing that always seems to be left out of talks about Ansel Adams is that he did a tremendous amount of dodging and burning on his prints - which of course were analog. I remember seeing a film of him working on prints and he can take days to experiment with dodging and burning and makes detailed maps of where it needs to be done, for how much time and the order that he carries out each step. The nice thing about digital is that this process is faster and you can undo mistakes without starting from beginning. What took days can now take an hour.

[@Wafflechicken47]

I always think of the zone system as a tool to aid the photographer with their intents. If your intention is to capture the full range of a scene, as you call "the proper way", the zone system makes that very straightforward to do so. But the zone system also helps to render subjects as you want them to be. Ansel Adams has a great example in "Leaf, Glacier Bay National Monument, Alaska", in his book 'the negative' he talks about exposing the leaf for zone 5 but developing with N+2, which moves the leaf's brightness to effectively zone 7. The book caption reads, "A normal 'realistic' interpretation would be quite drab". It's all about the artist's intent, but as pointed out in the video a lot of Ansel's work is full range and that's not the only way to use black and white photography.

[@jasonf3959]

I have the same preconceptions of the cone system as a tool to describe and analyze a scene as you previsualize it. Is the school scene example, it will be good to previsualize the shadow curve in zone 1 or 2, and the sky 7 or 8. That will be useful to inform the best exposure. Zone system is great for black and white photographers to learn to previsualize and shoot with more intention.

[@ChristopherPerezPhotographer]

Well said, this. When I worked as a black and white print tech in Hollywood in the early '80's there was an Adams show at the Municipal Museum (if memory serves). The way Adams interpreted the many dozens of prints then on display showed little to no gray. He had pushed the lights way up and the darks way down, retaining just a hint of tone and texture in each. They were glorious. Recently, I had a chance to confirm this memory at a show in Paris at the BnF out in the 13eme. It was an all black and white show and there was an Adams print. Sure enough, the blacks were pushed way down and the lights where pushed way up. There was practically no gray. What the Zone System gives is a way to make sure all the information you might want in interpretation (processing) is available to work with. It's really as simple as that.

[@davidstanton8668]

Fundamentally the zone system was created to allow the photographer to pre-visualize the result. Through deliberate decisions, the exposure AND the development are manipulated to achieve the result that the photographer saw in their mind's eye.

[@paulbonge6617]

Bravo! Indeed that is exactly what the system is/was for and you've said far more succinctly and clearly what I tried to say in my comment! Love the "Leaf" of Ansel's as well. I started learning with the Zone System Manual of Minor White as he was a good friend and early mentor of my father. I always preferred Minor's somewhat more streamlined approach that I found more comprehensible and less dense than Ansel's. Granted I was 10 years old when my father handed me his copy!

[@jeff8289]

Hi Alex. One of your best! One of the most helpful videos I have seen. While I aspire to AA's technique, you have shown that it isn't always what is needed to express what you see.

[@L.Spencer]

I got a lot of inspiration from this video. :)

[@arneheeringa96]

Ever heard of the Mortensen system?

[@thodenz8851]

Thank you Alex. You are able to explain the basics in a simple and straightforward manner so that one easily understands. The rest as always is practice and training.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you so much. I really do appreciate you taking the time to watch the video and to leave such a wonderfully supportive comment.

[@bernym4047]

I love to shoot black and white and have studied Adams' zone system and gradually, my images have improved. However, this video encapsulates what I have learned over many years from shooting B&W film to going digital. This video is a must for anyone wanting to master B&W photography. Regarding the last image with the flag against the sky, I was able to analyse the conversion to B&W just before you explained it. But seeing you 'dissect' the image cemented the process more clearly in my mind. You also gave me some fresh ideas for processing raw images when converting to B&W. I use darktable but it has some similar adjustment modules to LR. I have studied Adrian Vila, a super Spanish photographer who specialises in B&W and has been very helpful in developing my shooting skills for B&W. Many thanks for a super video. Possibly your best yet.

[@Dukey22]

Great video as always. I am starting to do Black and white photos. Will have to re watch this to write down all the great tips. I was always wondering how the zone system worked and how colour filters helped in Black and white photos. Keep up the great videos.

[@AK-hk2pd]

Now I appreciate the need for filters, thank you so much. Also, your coffee chat style is just what I need. Thanks and have a great week.

[@lisajoseph5817]

I think a lot of photographers would be better off if we substituted the word "principle" for "rule." Imagine the Principle of Thirds as a compositional tool instead of a rigid, unbreakable cage. Learn a principle so you understand how and when to use it or not. I grew up with black and white TV, magazine and print media, not to mention Dad's penchant for Ansel Adams calendars, so I was composing in black and white years ago. In fact, I'd never heard of the zone system until about three years ago. (Self taught shutterbug here, no photo school training.) I tried it - and for some images it's great. For others, it's not the direction I want to take the image in. Still experimenting with things as I go. Don McCullin's landscape work has me embracing darker edits and I keep testing how dark I can go with something. Great fun and rather exciting. Thanks as always for the content, Alex.

[@zoltanpuskas4722]

Alex, wonderful explanations of the Zone system and filters. Having learned the Zone system many years ago, I understand the basics but have modified them to my personal expression then and now in digital. It's always useful to know how things work.

[@mudswallow5074]

This is the most helpful instruction I've seen on B&W because it explains the "why" along with the "how." I am inspired to go out this weekend and make some pictures that I can play with in post. Thank you so much!

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you so much. I do feel that without telling somebody why you’re doing things telling them how to do it. It seems a bit pointless.

[@curiousabout1]

Great video! I love that you can present the knowledge you've earned so clearly and simply. I find myself thinking about your words very often when I'm out, and I'm sure this video is going to be echoing in my mind as well. Thank you.

[@Me.and.I.Photography]

I really find value in your content Alex, production information and delivery are perfect. Thank you for another great lesson 😊

[@TimGreigPhotography]

I never understood the zone system as being a tool to put specific things in specific zones. I always considered it as a method to be able to place things where you want them to be. It's a method of creative control. And as they say, "Freedom from discipline". Nice video

[@donjoe6326]

This video inspired me to go over my older photos and convert them to b/w. Suddenly some of them became more interesting than their counterparts in colour. Moreover I went out shooting some photos today with b/w in my mind and I started perceiving things differently. It allowed me to take shots that always seemed too mundane to me in colour. Thanks for the inspiring video!

[@grantbeerling4396]

As an amateur from an arts background, I can relate to much of what has been discussed here. The principle of play and ignoring rules and subjective opinions of the norm have meant, for me, some complete disasters when returning to an image (from which we learn), but also a few real successes that spur me/us on to get out there and find that image that is more than the sum of its parts. Great video. There is a real ache for us all to get the most from this medium.

[@luclefebvre436]

Thank you for your such generous and original contribution, your presentations are an absolute gem!

[@indiotizado]

Hi Alex, I’m really digging this new format for your content. Keep it up! This was a really interesting topic. It has really inspired me to revisit some of my images.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you. I’m glad that you’re enjoying this new approach. I am too. I’m finding it a lot easier to put across some of the points that I’m trying to make.

[@dedclownsRfunny]

I’m pretty new to photography and self taught since COVID. I must say I never understood all these pros saying the low and highlights always need to be seen with detail. I love the way some images look with solid blocks/areas of white or black. It’s not washed out or underexposed, I just prefer the way it looks as an image with those contrasts

[@NicoleHarrington-wn3hf]

Alex your videos help and inspire me so much. Thank you.

[@miraadi97]

Nicely explained for amateur people who want to explore photography in daily lives just amazing public pedagogy. Amazing to watch talking your experience and still exploring thirst to educate. Definitely I had just a vague idea of color theory in b&w with those filter concepts, definitely got one thing to work and improve. Definitely zoning would be now in my mind if it fits in that specific idea at time of click definitely a tool to have in the box. I tried astro in proper technique to get results, then those waving waters with RAW on Android mobile and had earlier explored B&W but will try directly instead in just editing as earlier I did. Thanks.

[@TheRob375]

Thank you for the inspiration and different view on black and white photos. I have a project that I wanted to convert some of the photos to black and white, I fiddled around and was discouraged and left it. Now many months later after watching this video I went back to the folder and selected some images. I am on fire again happy with the results. I got are hard look, waiting for the train that's not coming. Thank you for the nudge.

[@TheNitebinder]

After working with digital photography for 10 or 12 years, re-learning how photograph, develop, print all with 35mm b/w film can be terrifying. Even when using an Apple computer can be a daunting task. Some look forward to the challenge. Maybe I'll try to scan my old film negatives some day soon. Good teaching video.

[@bondgabebond4907]

Damn, you make me want to pull my Nikon F2 out of retirement and shoot B&W again. This time I will develop the film and not rely on the lab to screw it up like it has in the past. Those tips you gave, I remember from way back in time, are valuable. I totally forgot about them. I loved doing black and white photography back in the day, from the 1970s on. I have some nice photos of people I worked with or knew, and for the military base newspapers I worked on. We did nothing but black and white. Excellent presentation.

[@DSLBrown-dj7ry]

This was very, very helpful - huge thank you

[@russellbaston974]

Great video- once again and hopefully I'm interpreting it as meaning its always the final result that is the most important thing! The Zone System was very much a case of maximising the available materials ( the spectral response of film was not as good as later emulsions) and equipment of the day ( lenses then had a lot more flare than later!) . Adams was a trained classical musician and I believe, from that mindset, he created a 10 'note' photographic tonality scale ( he could have just chosen 8 - an octave equivalent ( not THAT sort of Equivalent) or maybe 13 if one goes chromatic. Adams used filters quite extensively in his book, I think "The Print" he showed various examples of Half Dome Yosemite with different filters to darken the blue sky and bring out the grey rock. With his photographic musician's hat on he emphasised that the negative was the photographer's "score" and like a musical score the print was the performance of the negative , which like musical performances could vary over a wide range of interpretations and by maximising the information recorded in the first place, by using the Zone system it gave the maximum range of choice for printing the final result. This was brought home to me when I went to see Adam's exhibition at the Barbican in 1987, many of his classic images were there but so significantly different to the "usual' appearance in the numerous monographs. The Barbican prints were almost shockingly so much darker and more dramatic in contrast, from the previous ones, the tonal range was severely edited and adjusted, the prints were made when Adams was in his final years and it has always struck me that they were almost the 'Beethoven late quartets' of his photographic output.

[@kenh.5903]

zone system = 11 zones

[@DebiSenGupta]

Another great video Can you please make another one with more details about the post processing esp like Alan Schaller

[@peterlieberzeit3138]

Interesting, extremely useful video! Though I mainly do color, I am surprised about the results of b/w conversions. So will definitely take the tips on board and go further down that lane.

[@urbantactical148]

The style of Alan Schaller is my favorite, that’s what I gravitate towards. I know he uses Leica monochrome cameras, I use a Nikon z6ii set to monochrome will I be able to achieve the same look?

[@mipmipmipmipmip-v5x]

0:18 the 1993 photo has arguably more character than the 2023 photo.

[@davidottman9501]

Thanks Alex! This sounds like fun homework to explore. :)

[@kif411]

Mind blown 🤯 thank you for the helpful tip of playing around with primary sliders to boast the tonality of a black n white image

[@daveeagle1559]

Useful prompt, having just returned from a BnW session with an XPro-2 using the Acros-R simulation, to reset that to Adobe Monochrome and then to be able to tweak the BnW Mix helps me get closer to what I imagined for the image. Thanks for the prompt.

[@jpdj2715]

Black & White (B&W) emulsions started - generally - with a light sensitivity in one spectral colour band and that's where the word "monochromatic" (mono=one, chromatic=colours) comes from. When we call B&W "monochromatic, that's a load of crap because in colour theory black, grey, and white, are not a "colour", so they're also not a "single colour". While film started with monochromatic sensitivity and generally in negative sensitivity, in order to get prints, a monochromatic emulsion was used too. In the darkroom that is an advantage as you can leave a coloured light on so you can see what you are doing. Calling B&W prints "monochromatic" is a stupid misnomer following from a transitive reference to the used photographic material's light sensitivity - generally made by people who have no clue whatsoever. As B&W film must depict grades of subject colour into grades of grey, having sensitivity in one spectral colour band means that a lot of colours will be depicted as black because the material has no sensitivity in these colours. While we may use an emulsion with blue only sensitivity in the darkroom for printing, pre-WW-II Hollywood, IIRC, used a monochromatic film with red sensitivity - so actors got black lipstick put on. And decors and clothing got adapted to work around the problem. So after this first generation of monochromatic (sensitivity) film, the industry came up with emulsions that had sensitivity in two spectral colour bands. These got called "orthochromatic" (orthos=correct). Well, so much for "correct", as we still miss part of the spectrum and hence have a suboptimal depiction of grades of colour into shades of grey. Not long after, the industry came up with film that had sensitivity in the entire humanly visible spectrum (usually more) of light and hence got called "panchromatic" (pan=all). This all still is about B&W film. Now the problem is that you can have several different colours that to your eye look completely different, but when you register these with B&W film (panchromatic) they could all have the same grey level and so the difference you see in colour disappears in B&W. The colour filters we use(d) in B&W had as purpose to influence the grey scale level of colours in the resulting B&W image. Note that while we discuss different qualities of chromatic here, we still have colourless prints, and the emulsions used to print on still are monochromatic because they have sensitivity in only one spectral band. Calling a Leica "Monochrom" in this sense is the greatest misnomer of the past 150 years. That camera is panchromatic. And the results printed photographically would be achromatic. But as we display these grey scale images on our colour monitors/displays, we display them in RGB. In a sense, is this are panchromatic? With a yellow filter applied to panchromatic B&W film, you get a much darker blue sky and grey/white clouds get brighter. This can make your images look like HDR. People might use a red filter instead but e.g. the red lips of people in the photo will become as pale as their (white) skin. The advantage we have today, of being able to shoot colour images, and in post convert these to B&W, while experimenting with the filter effect, is really great.

[@landesnorm]

Yes, all you write is true, and the semantical nature of nomenclature can be confusing or even misleading. I do have one thought about digital work, though. I believe that moving preproduction decisions to post-production manipulation fundamentally changes the mental/psychological process of photographing, and it modifies if not reduces or even eliminates the need for pre-visualization as defined by pre-digital photographers. This shift probably has farther reaching consequences which perhaps we are just beginning to understand. Consequently, IMO, the photographers of today are not the photographers of the past, and they probably need to develop new or different ways of thinking about their cameras and computers. Perhaps they also need to understand that the act of photographing may have a different meaning and/or purpose than it did in the past.

[@global.explorer]

Oh.

[@jpdj2715]

@@landesnorm - your pointing to the (cognitive) psychology of human vision is important to aspiring photographers, yes. If you're not born blind, then looking/watching is born into you, but seeing must be learned. We see the world upside down when we first can look. Using two eyes, we learn to derive (extrapolate) e.g. speed and direction of a ball and develop an ability to catch it. But we don't learn to "see" photographically in our brain. Developmental cognitive psychological research sheds a light on this. When mothers think their baby recognises them, the baby would also smile/grin to an oval board roughly size and shape of mother's face. A couple of weeks later, eyes and mouth must be on that board, but they just have to be in the board not necessarily in the right place. A few weeks later this needs to be in the right place and then a few weeks later it needs to be the real parent. So the brain splits the image from our eyes up into shapes and over time learns a few things about the relation between the blobs in the image. By the time a child is 10, having grown up in an environment with enough traffic, it can guesstimate speed and direction of traffic reasonably well and in my country would bike through town, or walk to school, all by itself. Deprived from the learning, the child would still have issues. In photography we must learn to see an image in reality by learning how to see the world with photographic accuracy. That needs training again. It may help speed up to go to the perspective drawing class in an art school. In my professional photography years, I remember the moment when I was about to shoot a portrait in the studio and fir the first time "saw" the image in my head before I shot it. I must have taken between 5,000 and 10,000 portraits at that moment, some 45 years ago. I dropped the cable release from the Hasselblad, posed the subject a bit differently, adjusted an effect light and made the shot. Perfect. Yesterday I saw a pro (earning his income from photography) in his YT video walk around with a smartphone that he used to demonstrate the effect of viewpoint, viewing angle, and crop (zoom), to the perspective in the resulting image. He may not yet be able to pre-envision the image in his brain, yet. That's not important here - what's important and missing from what he does is the conscious imagining of an image you want to take and after the shot the review of the difference between anticipation and result. Humans need some 10,000 training moments until they master a simple task - for the difficult ones its 10,000 hours. In my case, the 5,000 professional portraits were preceded by thousands of "amateur" ones. The fastest learning came from shooting thousands Polaroids where the time between pre-envisioning and review is short. With a smartphone that has a lens angle comparable to your big rig, you can go through the train-the-brain process very fast, but it needs to be conscious. And, shooting zoomlenses is a bad complication - only shoot primes in the training process.

[@seaeagles6025]

Hi Alex, I've heard of the Zone System but I didn't know you can use Filters in Black and White Photography. Thanks for mentioning that Alex, it's very useful to know. 😊.

[@larsoleruben]

Wow, this is such a valueable lesson!

[@TDtog2112]

Great informative video once again. Can you add the link for the London photo walk next month I don't want to be the only one 😂😂

[@siothrun72]

So with modern cameras, is there a setting you pick in advance or is b&w done in post?

[@davidskinner274]

You took the words out of my mouth when you got to the colour filter sliders in LR

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Is it a case of great minds think alike or fools never differ? 😝

[@jjkdc62]

very interesting. I began shooting almost exclusively in black and white about a year ago, and my vision with it has evolved in a similar manner.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Glad you enjoyed the video and it is helping you on your own journey through black-and-white

[@washingtonradio]

I think of the zone system not as a mandatory rule/method but as a tool to use to aid in b&w photography. It's very useful in many contexts but slavish obedience will ruin many photos.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

That was the mistake that I was making back when I got started in Le black-and-white photography is because of course I was learning it in a structured environment that required me to shoot in very specific ways for very specific assignments but of course in my head I forgot that you were able to obviously apply in more open ended way

[@petob8686]

I definitely shoot in jpeg and usually don't care about zone system. Because I'm in love with the Japanese artistic direction of photography called Provoke mainly from the 60s but some even before. But my point is that it gives you much more freedom to experiment.

[@TeddyCavachon]

I learned B&W processing from Kodak how to books in 1969 after purchasing a Nikonos II underwater camera to document my SCUBA adventures. I would wind up selling my tank and regulator a year later to buy a Nikon F and 1° spot meter to do PJ work at college, including documenting an experimental off campus Farm Term study experience with B&W and color transparencies. I learned the Zone System the following year then dropped out and got a job assisting top wedding photographer Monte Zucker from 1972 -74 then worked in the National Geographic photo lab reproducing photos for offset printing from 1974-77 which led me into printing management. The Zone System was widely understood back in the 70s because Adams made it unnecessarily confusing. It was just: expose for the shadows on the negative, then develop the negative so the highlights were rendered correctly on the print. What made it different from what I’d learned in the Kodak books is that Adams preferred to only use #2 contrast paper which in the Kodak system was used for photos taken on clear sunny days in cross lighting. One took a few test rolls bracketing around the rated film speed - e.g., 400 for Tri-X and adjusting if that meter setting didn’t adequately expose the shadows. If one wanted precise exposure control the exposure reading was taken from an 18% gray card in the direct sun, not the actual scene with might not reflect 18% on average. Once the film speed was dialed in, you tried different negative development times until find the one which matched the density range of the negative to the range of the #2 paper which was 3.0 to 3.1 density units. Where Kodak and Adams differed was on cloudy, overcast or open shade lighting with less contrast. With Kodak you still developed the film for the same time resulting in the same shadow detail but less density in the highlights of the negative. To compensate you printed on a #3 or #4 grade paper which had more contrast and would render the highlights correctly. Kodak made a #1 grade paper for extreme contrast like snowscapes of beach scenes in direct sun. With the Zone system we adjusted negative development time to match the scene lighting contrast range. This is how Adams and others did it back in the 1920s with orthochromatic film the could develop by eye under safelights like prints, pulling it out of the developer when experience told them the highlights were the right density to match the single grade of paper they were using. One just experimented with development times to find the one needed for partly cloudy, overcast, open shade etc. and made note of the contrast of the light when shooting the photo. Because I had a 1° spot meter and understood how meters work I realized that I could read the Zone 1 shadow detail in the scene and the adjust the ASA setting of the meter about three stops slower to expose the shadows on the film and print optimally, skipping the Gray Card metering and Zone V interpolation steps. Then I directly read a Zone 9 smooth non-specular white to determine precisely what the EV range was and from that precisely what development time was needed to fit the range of scene to print perfectly. Because I was using roll film and doing mostly PJ work under different lighting conditions on the same roll I also determined what Polycontrast Filter was needed for each EV range if I developed for sunny day conditions, adapting Zone System spot metering to the Kodak method of changing paper grade to match different EV ranges. It became very easy to created the same full range prints Adams did, with far less “artistic” smoke and mirrors than he suggested was necessary in his books. I also used his filter techniques to change contrast of sky with yellow, orange and red and brighten foliage with green, as well as editorializing and improving on what the camera captured with selective dodging and burning. When I went to work reproducing photos with halftones I discovered what shifting the midtone does to the appearance of photos. In digital editing it is what occurs by moving the middle slider in LEVELS or moving the middle of the linear response curve in CURVES. There was no way to GLOBALLY shift internal contrast like that on B&W film you were limited to SELECTIVE correction via dodging with a little paddle or burning in with card with hole or fingers. The difference between B&W and color film was you can’t change development to match scene contrast because it will affect color balance between the RGB emulsion layers. That is why photographers like Monte making the transition between B&W and color weddings had to learn to use the combination of FILL and KEY flash to change the contrast of the foreground to match the shorter range of the color prints. Monte was a innovator in that used of flash in which is why he became one of the most successful teachers of photography in the 1970s - 1990s when he retired. Digital sensors are like color prints having a fix range which is too short to record high contrast sunlit scenes. If highlights are exposed optimally retaining Zone 10 specular reflections on Zone 9 white objects shadow detail is usually lost. Less now than he first generation digitals back in the early 2000s. With digital if wanting a full range Adams like rendering of a scene outdoors shoot on a cloud or light overcast day where the entire scene fits on to the histogram the adjust contrast in post or shoot on a tripod exposing one frame 1/3 stop under clipping and a second with three stops less shutter speed. You can then combine with HDR AI but I prefer to open the both files, copy and paste the shadow exposure into the highlight one, add a black mask to the shadow exposure then selectively open the mask where I want more shadow detail, liked dodging but with detail and tone instead of just making noisy voids lighter in tone to make the view think there was detail recorded. When shooting outdoors I would usually have a flash on bracket and second on a stand for shooting subject in backlight from the sun but with my R6mkII I find I can usually just pull up the shaded side in post processing -my 580ex flashes aren’t compatible with it and I haven’t decided what to buy for it yet. Check out my channel for what I’ve been shooting lately. There is a B&W I did recently with the R6mkII.

[@geoffmphotography9444]

Excellent discussion thanks. Old hands like me know all about the Zone System and how it works but it pays to hear it again as a timely reminder that technology doesn't replace a bit of thought. I've accepted that photography has moved on and I use a phone mostly (with a clamp grip) these days but it still pays to apply that 'old' knowledge.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Hi Geoff Is good to see your comment here. I’ve often found that people say something similar that there is always time to revisit some of the older Lidge and just get a bit of a refresher.

[@creative_cozmic]

I have seen some older artists talk about meticulously keeping everything in a b&w photo properly exposed and never under or over exposing. Some of my favourite photographs have either or both under and some overexposure which adds to the overall artistic value of the photo. The fact that photography doesn’t have any strict rules means we can all use under and over exposure in b&w images where appropriate to express our creative vision. All of those silhouette photographs where the subject is in shadow usually will be accompanied by an over exposed light source. One of my favourite photographs is by Trent Parke taken in a train station where an old man has walked into a patch of light and is completely overexposed.

[@tomgagner7366]

Hi Alex, Great video. I remember when I was a child in the 50-ties that some had a collection of filtes in small leather cases attached to the camera strap. Worth mentioning is perhaps that if you are using a monochrome camera like the Leica monochrome you have to use the filters on the lens while shooting since there isn't any colour information in the raw file. That's why I prefer not using a monochrome camera.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Do you know my quite miss all those little accessories that used to clutch up my photography bag?

[@WMedl]

A very inspiring video, thank you! To my mind the zone system does not prescribe the position of the zones on an image nor the grades of dynamic range in an image. The 10 zones can be arbitrarily moved to your convenience. It is the photographer that decides on the position of e.g. the “middle gray” or the just discernible dark or white parts. So if I want to let almost all dark parts be complete black then I will set the zone 0 accordingly having a lot of brighter parts being almost burned out.

[@tadc]

I am a geriatric amateur photographer who started with B&W film back in the 60's. This is why the concept of filters (I used green, yellow and orange back then mostly) is second nature to me. For the young, it may not be so. Specially if implemented digitally in a software staring from a RAW file.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Yes, that’s why I thought it would be worth just discussing the idea and how they work in a practical sense on film to try and help people make sense of it in a digital environment

[@drichi07]

I may be misremembering, but Adam's Zone System was a bit more flexible. He allow for using different zones for different parts of a photo for different results. For example, exposing a normal zone five to result in a zone 6 brightness might work well in some cases. I have his books, but I haven't read them for years. I don't think the Zone system has much use at all in digital photograhy anyway. The problem I see with so many online black and white photos is over-done extreme contrast. A good cure for that is to print them and see how they look on paper. Then again, if you mostly have viewed photos online since the digital era began, you might say they look just fine. Some go to the other extreme of 50 Shades of (boring) Grey because that's the way they were on film and paper back when there were real photographers. (Now get off my grass!) Somewhere between the two is, in my opinion, the best balance. I suppose that's obvious though.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

In the video I was trying to stress that this is of course my understanding of the zone system and how it works for me and a practical sense obviously everybody’s mileage may vary

[@sbai4319]

Thank you Alex! I love Black and White Photography. I have been inspired by Anton Corbijn and Allen Schaller.

[@OricoTechsMarketingManager]

Black and white photography tests the photographer's skills and has higher requirements for the shooting scene.👍

[@fineartviewfotografie3742]

Schaller and Corbijn are my absolute favorites! Don’t forget, Alan Schaller is using a true monochrome camera, without color information!

[@landesnorm]

Well, everyone has to come to grips with the Zsystem on their own. Some photogs and instructors think that the Zsys requires all zones in all images; however, I disagree. To me, the Zsys is only a tool to judge relative values in scene, and it is incomplete without knowledge of your film's latitude and your developer's effect. Compressing a film's latitude and a scene's range to achieve a graphic effect is the photog's prerogative and relies upon visual imagination and experience as well as gut response. Extending a film's latitude is equally a creative and sometimes a technical decision. Filtration relies upon the film's or chip's sensitivity to color; i.e. panchromatic v. orthochromatic, or IR sensitivity v. visible spectrum. In general, the color of a filter will lighten same colors in a scene and darken opposing colors. How to choose? Well, that takes experience and creative vision. To know how your film/chip "sees" a scene is important. Some scenes have all 10 zones, some have more, some have less. The choice to extend/compress those values is yours, but you need to know your film/chip's unadulterated response to a scene first. Or, at least, that helps. I consider that part of developing your vision.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

That was one of the reasons why I felt I should touch upon it in this video and rather than saying it doesn’t matter give some insight into how I managed to end up interpreting it in my own way and in a fashion that suited how I wanted to take photographs

[@SloopJohnBee-vq6dw]

Thanks for the video Alex 👍📸

[@richardhale9664]

I struggled to understand the point of the zone system for many years. I was just happy using incident light measurements with a separate meter and by and large getting satisfactory results. When I pointed this out to Edward Martins he explained that the zone system allows you to see if a scene will fit in with the latitude of your film or dynamic range of your sensor. If it doesn't you have choices to make. Do you want to focus on your highlights or shadows or do you really want to take the picture at all? If it does one can go ahead and take the shot. You can worry about highlights and shadows later. Personally I always worry more about highlights than shadows, usually wanting at least some detail in them. There is a reason classical painters used the techniques of chiaroscuro and tenebrism.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you so much for watching the video. I hope you enjoyed it and also really appreciate you taking the time to leave a comment.

[@angelamaloney4871]

I moved to Australia from the States. And I shipped my photobook collection in April. It still hasn’t arrived yet. :-( This video made me miss it quite a bit because I have work by all the photographers you discussed (except your own work-where’s your book?) and I’m currently very focused on B&W. So I wanted to go back and look the work of these photographers and some others. But I can’t because my collection that includes their work isn’t here yet. :-( But one of the things I’ve discovered in my love of B&W is a love of zones 0 and X like you discuss here! Don’t usually use them the same way though. But that’s the joy of photography!

[@ThePhotographicEye]

I am glad that you’re enjoying the video and I do hope that you books turn up soon and they’re not damaged unlike some of mine where when I ship them to the states

[@joedoe7572]

In indoor settings, how do you get such high contrast in your black and white photos? How do you force it to have such deep shadows and such bright highlights at the same time?

[@DH-kx7ej]

After decades of experience as a professional (portrait photographer) it is always a great pleasure to hear your thoughts.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you for watching the video. I’m glad that you enjoyed listening to my story about the black-and-white photography.

[@olaandersson6670]

I liked this video. But I think the zone system was a practical tool for the photographer to fast get what he wants. Each zone is a stop o the camera. So I stop up or down to the place I believe is midle grey. And then there is a development and printing to it. I guess bad teachers use the zone system as a rule but I can't see this is what Ansel Adams meant. But I really got inspired from this video. You do have a good point.

[@insightvideo6136]

You only mention half of the zone system being used in your early work. Adam’s also mentioned the processing end of it. It’s not only exposure, it’s processing as well. In digital, expose for the highlights develop for the shadows…opposite for film. You can’t go wrong following that advice, but you must follow All of that advice. The zone system IS the be all and end all, because if used properly, it allows you to capture your vision, not just what the camera exposes technically. That’s the whole reason behind it.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Yes I could’ve talked about all the processing about how you expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights but I wanted to try and keep it accessible without jumping fully into the zone system and all of his intricacies which is also wire linked to that more in-depth video on the Zen system at the end

[@insightvideo6136]

@@ThePhotographicEye …Understood. Great video. Thanks.

[@alstuart8801]

Cracking video Alex!

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you

[@alistairbarclay3116]

I have never succeeded in getting the sort of result when converting that you girl example on the header image showed especially that skin glow

[@JayJayNay]

You mention that we don’t need to put filters before our lenses (because we have LR or C1P e.g.) but we have some great solely B&W cameras who only can take B&W photos. Talking Leica. Several M models as well as the impressive Q2 Monochrom. Informative video anyway. Thank you. 🙏

[@johnclark1884]

Great video!

[@waynethorn7218]

Those 4 first photos are really good and I like them, real people going about their business. Studio photos are staged even they’re good but not for me lol.going to check out the Zone System tomorrow Alex👍another great video that nobody has never done ✔️

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you so much. I’m glad that you think this is a unique take. I really enjoy hearing that. It’s also nice to hear that you like the earlier work as well

[@theusbadenhorst]

Love the image with oom paul in chuch square!

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thanks - apparently its fenced off these days

[@theusbadenhorst]

Someone tried to harm themselves there.

[@vladimirpevzner6037]

Hi! good to see you again, Alex! How are you? Thank you for your chennal once more. very useful and very interesting!

[@yippyskippy2066]

I really appreciate your comment about what B&W does, it brings to the surface the geometrical elements of an image.

[@ianforber]

I’ve never bothered following the zone system but my takeaway from it is simply that most (not all) b&w pictures need some black in it and some white in it but not necessarily everything in between. I’m a fan of Schiller and his very graphic design approach but I’m also a fan of Jane Brown and some of her portraits are very bold (eg Orson Welles or Rita Tushingham) and some much less so (eg Mick Jagger or Richard O'Brien) but almost all have some solid black and pure white in it somewhere.

[@paulbonge6617]

But the Zone System is not the same as todays in camera processors that want to make everything gray. It IS critical in film photography to produce a well-balanced & exposed negative, especially in B&W from which you are able to more easily produce a good print. That is rudimentary I know, and I know you already comprehend this but another crucial part of using the Zone System was previsualization of the finished print before ever setting up your tripod and grabbing a film holder. If you made a decision that you wanted a higher contrast final print and to lose a lot of the shadow to a near 0 on the zone system, you'd meter your subject and use the system NOT to produce a negative with all the middle and low ranges properly exposed, but one that would facilitate your final previsualization. As in the second Ansel print you displayed. One would also make a choice as to filters as well. You are absolutely correct that it's not the "Be ALL and End ALL" to be sure and I never liked Ansel's rather pedantic, overthought and far to complicated explanation of the Zone System. I much preferred my father's friend Minor White's little pamphlet small book if you will, Zone System Manual "How to Previsualize your Pictures" and I still have my later edition and the original though I dispensed with being overly concerned with using the system as a lot of it was internalized long ago. Now after 50 years of snapping that shutter, and with the advent of digital, there's less call for the Zone System as the entire process is far more forgiving with so much more latitude across the range in each exposure especially if you're shooting RAW. I do find that the Zone System tickles the back of my mind as I'm working in post, just the same as it comes up when I'm out and about shooting. If someone is choosing to shoot film today and expressly B&W, it really is helpful, and I'd say almost critical that they at least understand the Zone System and have a pretty firm grasp of how to apply it and then make decisions how you're going to work along that scale to get the results you're wanting. I'll get back to your wonderful video now, and I've been really enjoying your videos for a while now, and I'm sure I'll find that you have said and in summation, said pretty much what I just did. 😂 Thanks for another fine video and more interesting photography to look at.

[@garygoldsmith2889]

Love all the comments, and as always, Alex's discussion. But what will become of Alex's famous yellow coffee mug in B/W? I'll miss it.

[@johnpap9328]

I had a different understanding of the zone system than what you present here. My perception of it is how to understand light and visualise the picture. Back when I was learning how to properly expose my pictures, I came across the zone system and got 'the negative' by Ansel Adams. For me it was a revelation. Even today, some ten years since I switched to digital, I only expose manually. Not because it's macho or anything, but because I find programme confusing. I see dark scene in which I want to make a white object stand out? I expose for that in zone VII. I'm shooting landscape? I expose for the sky in zone V or VI. Then I also measure other parts of the scene and visualise my image. Sometimes I make corrections, sometimes not. All this before pushing the button. Remember the story of that picture Adams shot of the moon rising over a valley? He couldn't find his exposure metre but knowing the luminance of the moon, he just placed it in zone VII. The zone system, I find, is the only way I know what I shot, since one cannot really judge exposure from the screen on camera, and histogram...well, it's not that detailed. So, to my understanding, the zone system isn't for black and white only, nor is it for photographs in which one retains the full spectrum of tonalities from 0 to X. Rather, it's a tool for taking any picture. And of course, thank you for the video

[@garyjames-ij4fr]

Well said.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

I think one of the biggest issues with his own system is that it is so open to interpretation and of course everybody can apply in their own ways but it’s also presented often to the beginner as some sort of dogmatic process which makes it feel difficult to get to grips with

[@johnpap9328]

@@ThePhotographicEye I think I see what you mean. Haven't had any such experience... haven't been to photo school after all and don't know how the zone system was/is taught. But some parts of our tutoring are unwittingly subjected to antithesis.

[@michaelcase8574]

Ansel Adams used the zone system. But used it. It didn't use him. He also spent hours in the darkroom dodging and burning in and selective developing his prints. The zone system gave him the best negative with which to apply his genius.

[@jeffslade1892]

Possible silly question - why are so many mono photos shot as or cropped to 1:1 format? (me too)

[@ThePhotographicEye]

I just like the square format it feels natural for me and comfortable hence why I shoot so much like that

[@stevecooney1361]

brilliant vlog, thank you

[@kennethnielsen3864]

Thanks for sharing.

[@finite934]

does anyone buy/use filters on-camera anymore or is it just as effective (and cheaper) to do the work in post-processing?

[@philliphickox4023]

I still have have my Hoya filters from my film days

[@ThePhotographicEye]

I have no idea where my filters ended up. I probably sold them on eBay.

[@philliphickox4023]

@@ThePhotographicEye I also found the original boxes that they came in.

[@tedbrown7908]

You really can't control light by using the zone system with cameras. Modern cameras, you can adjust exposure levels better and that might be considered a zone system.

[@lensman5762]

It appears that you neither understand the zone system nor how the exposure meter of your camera tell you. Zone system is not about adjustments, it os about visualisation and the required control over the exposure to achieve that visualisation, and that is just a start as zone system is from camera to print. It is OK if people do not understand the zone system or dont want to use it in your visualisation, but to say that modern cameras do this and that and we don't need to understand exposure, is so sad. I am sorry to be blunt.

[@landesnorm]

My apologies, but I don't quite understand your statement. Could you explain what you mean by "controlling light"?

[@stevensvideosonyoutube]

That was cool.

[@Smoothblue90]

Great video. Thank you.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

It’s my pleasure thank you so much for watching

[@andycakebread7663]

See it. Feel it. Then get all imposter syndrome and do not a lot with it! You've reignited my photo head Alex 🍻

[@Heart0rHead]

15:21 I would crop out that "window" on the left

[@ThePhotographicEye]

I prefer the window as I think it balances stuff out

[@jarsok245]

Discoveries of a Lifetime Books by Bruce Barnbaum it's worth getting acquainted... how the zone system was used .Not every scene requires a zone system, it's a matter of taste and the result you want to achieve, but no one has yet come up with anything better. greetings from Poland

[@julieduncan1996]

Not a fan of Angel Adams , but I do love B&W photography. Don’t care about the zone system, and I shoot what looks good to me. Maybe that’s why I’m not rich and famous. 😅

[@ShesUnreal]

Learning is occurring 🧠

[@waynethorn7218]

Just an afterthought , I think James Revilious takes enchanting photos. I love the silver mid tones ❤

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you very much for watching the video and I appreciate your suggestion

[@johnstarkey4959]

I use a Leica Q2 Monochrome, using colour filters is paramount as you don’t have any colour sliders in Lightroom , I hear people say , do it in PP , imo opinion it’s not possible to do with a pure BW sensor , interesting video.

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Can you not convert that file into an IGB file and have access to the colour slide as that way?

[@johnstarkey4959]

@@ThePhotographicEye It never crossed my mind to try that to be honest , I’ll try that tomorrow 🤝

[@swig46]

@@ThePhotographicEyeI don’t think you can, as there is no color data in the raw files.

[@NorbertGünther-u8v]

Top!

[@UnitasPhotography]

I love your videos but I have to disagree with your interpretation of the zone system. When discussing capturing a proper image with the zone system it is a start to creating the best possible raw image to edit, not an end point to a final edit. Ansel's zone system has three parts to it, the camera, the negative and the darkroom. This video dismisses the latter two parts as being part of the zone system

[@simonpayne7994]

Light Zones are a logarithmic unit of measure for luminosity similar to EV100. The difference is that EV100 is an absolute measure with zero chosen at 1s, f/1.0, ISO 100, whereas the middle of the Light Zone scale, Zone V, is set to the exposure level that happened to be needed under the given lighting conditions for the infamous 18% gray. Going up or down one zone is the equivalent of going up or down one "stop". Zone 0 is therefor 5 stops down from Zone V. Zone X is 5 stops brighter. The basic idea of the Light Zone system was, somehow or other, to get the luminosity values of the scene nicely tucked into the 11 Light Zones from 0 (black) to X (white). This included fiddling around with the development processing time used for the negative and doing likewise for the subsequent print. The aim was to utilize the full dynamic range of the two film materials involved. At the very front end, the photographer ran around doing spot luminosity measurements of the subject to make sure various bits and pieces came into the specific Zones according to plan. About filters. According to my knowledge, B&W film is not overly sensitive to the color blue. The problem that really existed was sensitivity to UV light in mountain regions. This could be fixed by using an UV filter. Furthermore. Skies are not blue anyway. They are a good bit towards cyan. At full saturation blue is the darkest color of all and appears almost black on B&W film. Cyan on the other hand appears quite bright, and, if not fully saturated, even brighter. The filter to filter out the color of sky and make the B&W image of the sky darker looks orange. It does not enhance anything. It just blocks the color of the sky. The reason it looks orange is because it lets all colors through, except "sky-blue-cyan". Many color combinations can look orange. Pure spectral orange, mixed red light and yellow light, two other carefully chosen and appropriately proportioned spectral colors, the whole color spectrum with just one color missing - i.e. sky-blue-cyan. Such a filter does not enhance red. It does not enhance anything. Converting a color image to black and white can also be problematic. Unfortunately, current photo editing software does not always convert to black and white correctly. Apart from that, just turning the saturation of a color image down to 0% delivers absolute rubbish gray levels. In reality the luminosity values needed should be calculated off the RGB values by: Y = 0.11 B + 0.30 R + 0.59 G This is the formula that was used to provide a monochrome signal for B&W TV sets as analog color TV (NTSC, PAL, SECAM) was introduced. Some editing software does it, some does not.

[@SaboteurC64]

I would just say don't call your beginner photos "rubbish" honor them, they were part of your growing process. 😊

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Thank you very much for saying that, but of course the word rubbish fits onto a KZbin title a lot easier!

[@jasongold6751]

My advice! My opinion! The Zone System a waste ot time! Great for individual frames! How with a roll of 36 or 24 exposures? Digital makes life easy and fun. Phone plus Snapseed. I have 2 small cameras set to BW only!

[@thelonious1634]

Idk. I actually liked your b/w Ursula photo the most. Not a big fan of Alan Schaller, or high contrast b/w photography in general. To each his/her own.

[@SimplyMe-SM]

*So, fake it till you make it, yes?*

[@robford3211]

I think that even if it was possible for all the b/w photographers to shoot like Ansel Adams that would be a catastrophe like an atomic bomb dropped on New York . Great photography is about your individual authentic way doing you not following Ansel, Leonardo or Warhol

[@ThePhotographicEye]

Yes, that is very true and I hope that when people watch the video and they see from my own experiences that they feel a little bit freer to how they approach their own black-and-white photography

[@LaughingStock_]

You are kidding yourselves if you think digital B&W is the real deal. Nothing renders a B&W image like a roll of film. Dump the virtual imagery, folks - go to something that you can hold in your hand, that will exist in tangible form in 100 years. Go analogue.