Ha!  I love it!

Being a completely new amateur at this LF thing, and wanting to
experiment a bit, I read a couple of books (well ok, I scanned thru'
them :-) ) about the zone system, and summarised what I had read as
being exactly what is presented above or, as I interpreted.........::
1) meter the range of brightness in the scene
2) expose for detail in the dark areas
3) develop with compensation for the overexposure in the bright areas

Ok -  it's a bit simple, but then so is my knowledge and ability so far.
This has worked well for me any time I have managed to be disciplined
enough to apply it.

just my newbie $0.02 worth

cheers

The technical conversations above are awesome, indeed.  If you want a "zone
system for poor people" that doesn't even use a densitomer, though, I have a
modest suggestion.  It is a poor man's zone system not in terms of expensive
equipment, but in terms of a crude approximation--but eminently workable--of
Adam's Zone System.

By measuring the brightest non-specular highlight in the scene, and the
dimmest shadow in which you want to preserve detail, you can establish a
"brightness range," which will usually vary between, say, 2 and 10 f-stop
equivalents.  You can work out a schedule of varying development times for
each such brightness range.  And then you'll always wind up with negatives
of superb quality:  there will be no blocked highlights or totally black
shadows (with NO detail), and the negatives will always print nicely on #2
paper.

And that, in its essence, is what Adams' Zone System is all about: avoiding
blocked highlights and black shadows.

Years ago I wrote a tiny book detailing this.  It was called "How to Be
Positive About the Negative."  It is now out of print, but I have a few
dozen copies stashed in the corner of my darkroom.  Let me know if you're
serious about B&W photography, and if you think the Positive System could
help.  I'll shoot you a copy, with compliments and encouragement.

R.W. Behan

I've been reading about the zone system and I'd like to start
experimenting with it... the only problem is I can't afford a
densitometer to do my calibrations.  Is there point in trying to use
the zone system without calibrating?  What about using a scanner as a
densitometer?  We are thinking about getting a microtek scanmaker i900
where I work - which boasts 48 bit / 4.2 max density.  So I would have
access to that, but I don't know much about the technicals of scanners
- if 4.2 is good enough or not.  I think it would work for negative
scans since there is no glass, but I'm not sure about scanning prints.

Also, I shoot purely roll film right now...  can I just substitute
development adjustments with contrast filters?  Or does it not work
that way?