Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site python.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!python!johnm
From: johnm@python.UUCP (J. Montgomery)
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Re: Is OM-4 Junk?
Message-ID: <170@python.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 8-Aug-85 10:22:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: python.170
Posted: Thu Aug  8 10:22:21 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Aug-85 14:24:01 EDT
References: <1520@trwrba.UUCP> <9414@ucbvax.ARPA> <174@tekig4.UUCP>
Reply-To: johnm@python.UUCP (J. Montgomery)
Distribution: net
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Lines: 19
Summary: 

> Puh-leeze!  The zone system is a sensitometric approach, not a cookbook!  The
> development adjustments are a REFINEMENT of the approach, NOT the be-all and
> end-all of the technique!  You most certainly CAN do "zone system photography"
> without individual frame development.

Yes, well said.  Modern films, especially in 35mm, don't tolerate expansion/
contraction as well as the thick emulsions of the past (and a change of
paper grade will usually do the job anyway), so there is less call for this
nowadays.  The real core of the Zone System is previsualization and zone
placement.  My guess is that the problem with trying to do Zone System
photography with the OM-4 is that would be difficult to make placements on
zones other than Zone V.  I suppose you could use the exposure compensation
(i.e. set it on +1 stop to place on Zone VI) but this might be awkward, and
I always forget to undo the compensation.  It would probably be just as easy
to use a manual camera and a spotmeter with a zone dial.
-- 
	John Montgomery
	Bell Communications Research
	...{allegra, ihnp4, decvax, ucbvax}!bellcore!python!johnm