Jeff, thanks for pointing out that error. I was trying to give an example when people might legitimately "overexpose", but my brain was going faster than my fingers, and I left out some important words. That paragraph should have read:(posted 9397 days ago)On that basis, if your subject has a contrast range of 8 stops, AND you set your meter to 2 stops slower than your film's ISO, AND you meter shadows and highlights, AND you calculate the mid-point, AND you set your camera to that reading, you will capture all the tones. Depending on your meter, you *might* get the same result by setting the meter 1 or 2 stops slower than your film's ISO, and taking an average reading.
Jeff also says: "DON'T underexpose and DON'T overdevelop." I only partly agree with this. I do believe that developing for more than normal is OK, when the intention is to increase contrast. In these circumstances, the film might neeed a slighty increased EI to compensate, at the shadow end of the characteristic curve. Adams calls this "N+1", or whatever. But overdeveloping in order to underexpose is only OK if we remember that we will also increase contrast.