Sometimes the effect of a filter can be dramatic. Other times it may be more subtle, but using the right filter will nearly always improve the photograph.
A situation in which choosing and changing filters made an obvious difference was when I was in Chaco Culture National Historical Park (commonly called Chaco Canyon). In the ruins named Pueblo Bonito, I came upon an interesting wall that stood out against the sky. When photographed in black and white without a filter, however, the sky was much lighter than the wall (fig. 60). This was not what I had in mind. The sky was a distraction to me, pulling my eye away from the wall. I wanted the wall to stand out from the sky.
The stone had a red color so I tried a red-orange (#041) filter, increasing the exposure by the recommended two stops and bracketing. I used the bracketed shot that gave me a half-stop less exposure than that recommended by the filter factor (fig. 61). This under-scores the fact that filter factors are merely guides. If I had just used the filter factor, my negative would be overexposed.
The #041 filter helped quite a bit. The sky is now considerably darker than the wall.
The shape of the wall is better defined by the sky in this shot. Although it doesn’t change the tonal relationships in the foreground, the darker sky makes the foreground a more
Figure 59. (opposite) This is the same exposure as figure 57, taken with the B+W red (#091) filter—f/11 at 90 seconds.
Cutting developing to 41⁄2 min-utes (as in figure 58) shows an even greater change in contrast.
C R E A T I V E B L A C K - A N D - W H I T E P H O T O G R A P H Y
104
Figure 60. In the ruins of Pueblo Bonito, photographing in black and white without a filter resulted in the sky being much lighter than the wall.
105
U S I N G F I L T E R S C R E A T I V E L Y
Figure 61. The same shot with a B+W red-orange (#041) filter. The exposure, which was a half-stop less than that recom-mended by the filter factor, was one-and-a-half stops over the unfiltered shot (fig.
60).
C R E A T I V E B L A C K - A N D - W H I T E P H O T O G R A P H Y
106
Figure 62. When choosing a low angle, the sky is often too bright, as in this unfiltered photograph shot in White Sands.
prominent part of the photograph. There’s even a bit more implied dimensionality in the photo made with the #041 filter. The sky recedes while the wall advances toward the viewer.
The difference is dramatic enough that even a nonphotographer can see it. Note that both prints were made at exactly the same exposure. Any differences between the photographs are due to the effect of the filter, not to any darkroom variations.
Even when the differences between unfiltered and filtered photographs can be pro-found, variations caused by switching the filter used can be much more subtle. Upon close inspection, though, the differences become more apparent. A series of photographs that I did at White Sands National Monument clearly illustrate this point.
In the evening, as the sun dips toward the horizon, the quality of light is wonderful. This is especially true with large expanses of flat surfaces, such as those in many landscapes.
The low-lying sun brings out the dimensionality of the terrain at this time of day. If you pick your angle right, it also adds depth to other subjects. At White Sands, I liked the way the texture of the yucca plant was defined by this light, which also brought out the texture of the sand.
Choosing a low angle to make the plant loom larger in the foreground (and the fore-ground itself nearly disappear), I was once again faced with the familiar situation of a sky that was too bright (fig. 62). Even though the clouds in the distance make the sky seem
107
U S I N G F I L T E R S C R E A T I V E L Y
Figure 63. The B+W red-orange (#041) filter made a significant difference. The exposure was three stops more than that of the unfiltered shot, which was one stop over the 4X filter factor rec-ommendation.
darker, the brightness of the sky dominates the plant. A filter is obviously needed here, but which one?
My usual starting filter, the red-orange (#041) made a significant difference (fig. 63).
This was just as I had expected. The exposure was one stop over the filter factor recom-mendation (4X)—three stops more than the unfiltered shot. The rendition is quite pleasing.
It especially makes a difference where the branches of the yucca set against the sky. There’s also a more subtle change in the tonal relationships of parts of the plant itself. The left-hand side, which was slightly withered and brown, stands out against the right side of the plant, which was still dark green. The clouds are also more clearly defined in the background.
Using the light red (#090) filter instead produced more subtle differences than I had expected (fig. 64). This shot was made a half-stop over the recommended filter factor (8X), or about three-and-a-half stops over the unfiltered photograph. The clouds stand out a little more strongly because the sky is slightly darkened. The sand also seems brighter for the same reason. Because the skylight that’s reflected into the shadows has a large portion of cyan, the shadows are also darkened. The greens of the plants are darker, too. Some photographers think this is a gain in contrast, but that’s not the case. These prints were all on the same paper grade, so the contrast of the negative has not changed. What has changed is the local, or apparent, contrast—that is, the relationship between specific tones.
C R E A T I V E B L A C K - A N D - W H I T E P H O T O G R A P H Y
108
Figure 64. Using the B+W light red (#090) filter, this shot was made a half-stop over the recom-mended filter factor (8X), or about three-and-a-half stops over the unfiltered photograph.
For a less dramatic effect, I used the green (#061) filter with an exposure a stop over the recommended one-and-a-half stops (fig. 65). The overall effect is similar to what would be expected with a yellow filter—the sky is a little darker than that of the unfiltered shot.
The green filter lightens green foliage, making the sky look darker than it actually was. Look at the plant’s branches against the sky. The green filter produces the most natural rendi-tion of all the shots. Although I like the effect, I prefer the light red filter for this scene.
It is only by taking many photographs, using various filters, and comparing the results that you’ll begin to acquire an intuition regarding filters. Understanding how filters function is a science. Using them is a craft. Knowing what the results will be is the art of using filters.
✺
109
U S I N G F I L T E R S C R E A T I V E L Y
Figure 65. With the B+W green (#061) filter and an exposure two-and-a-half stops over the unfiltered setting (and a stop more than the recommended one-and-a-half stops), the overall effect is similar to that expected with a yellow filter.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
111
E
very time I teach a class or a workshop on advanced black-and-white photography, someone asks me about the Zone System. Some photographers want it explained, others want to know what they’re doing wrong. Usually I tell them to slow down. My advice is, don’t worry so much about the Zone System.That doesn’t mean that I think the Zone System is worthless, or even that it should be disregarded. Rather, I believe too many photographers are concerned with specifics about the Zone System. Are my film densities right? is a question I often hear. For most photog-raphers, a general understanding of the Zone System is more important than absolute adherence. The specifics can vary from photographer to photographer, while the general points will remain constant. Every photographer must find the specifics that apply to his or her work. There are few immutable considerations when it comes to producing and judg-ing an individual’s work. You need to learn to trust your own instincts.
In fact, blindly following the Zone System can be detrimental. Often it causes photog-raphers to move in a direction away from their best efforts. Sometimes an image doesn’t need a full tonal range. On the other hand, a full-toned photograph with no sense of the photographer’s aesthetics is often a vacuous image. The line between technical excellence and technique for its own sake is often a fine one. You need to find for yourself how best to toe that line.