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