Digital BW, The Print

Again, this is very rudimentary zone work - this is
not film based media, and it is difficult to actively
transfer all aspects of a proven methodology.

> I think the technique is good, 

Thanks, but its not mine.  Fred and Ansel did most of
the work.

> but I would recommend
> taking it a bit further and finding out: 
> 
> 1) How many zones can you record in a single
> exposure.

As my work is based upon the least amount of
manipulation (and time in photoshop eeking every
nuance of detail), as well as placing one specific
zone - it really does not matter how many zones I can
record - as long as the placed zone is correct. 

> 2) At what zone does your camera overexpose and blow
> out the highlight detail.

Without photoshop manipulation, useful detail range is
from zones 3 - 7.  Zone 8 shows some detail, and 9 is
pretty much paper white.  So, this is a standard scale
in traditonal zone work.  Additionally, it allows for
an exceptional "negative" if you wish to get the best
print possible. 

Kinda like cheer - keeps the white's white and, well,
you get the point. 

> 
> Of course with most digital cameras you can always
> check the histogram after the shot.  

That's why I use this system - you don't have to check
the histograms.  What is the fun word for those of us
always checking the little screen?  Ahh yes,
"chimping" - I've been known to do that all too much.

> It would be
> nice if the built-in metering took into account all
> pixels and fit every scene into the dynamic range of
> the camera for each shot.  Maybe some day...
> 
> --Tom

I agree - but wouldn't that strip the final remaining
joy out of photography?  They have to make it a little
difficult for us consumers.

Don



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com