And where is that "O" mark? Only three stops above Zone V, that's where! I can see that words alone aren't going to convince. Here's a Kodak calibrated greyscale against an evenly-lit surface that I'd definitely call "Whites with texture and delicate values...". The definition of Zone VIII according to Adams (p. 60 of 'The Negative' - 6th printing 1984). Exposure was ISO 400, 1/13th s @ f/2.8, according to an incident meter reading from centre frame. Now the same, at the exposure indicated by a spot reading from the whitewashed wall above the greyscale. I.e. placing the wall on Zone V. This clearly shows the subtle texture in the paint (crazing and brush strokes). Here's the same with exposure compensation of + 2.33 stops applied to the camera - i.e. placing the white wall at Zone VII + 1/3rd. The camera indicated a shutter speed of 1/10th sec. I've also superimposed part of the greyscale from the 'Zone V' exposure to prove that there is a genuine 2.33 stops difference between the exposures. Each division on the Kodak greyscale is a density step of 0.1, which equates to a 1/3rd stop exposure step. So step 7 = 2.33 stops. Now let's try to place the wall on Adams' Zone VIII with a + 3 stop compensation. Whoa! Where have all our "texture and delicate values" gone? Blown out, that's where. So much for 3 whole stops between Zone V (=18% reflectance) and Adams' description of Zone VIII, plus his insistence that each Zone is exactly a stop change in exposure. This is easier to see in a histogram, where the white wall endstops the right-hand side of the graph. OK. It's only half-a-stop, and you could get away with that in B&W film. Not so with a digital JPEG, where that extra third to half a stop exposure is critical, and will blow away that delicate detail needed in near-whites. So, if the Zone system is to stay relevant in this digital age, then its Zones need re-defining. Or we can simply work in good 'ol f-stops and chuck the pretentious Roman numerals away for good. Since adding the Latin for one-third or one-half a Zone would make an over-complicated system even more unwieldy. FWIW. The 'M' step (0.7D) on Kodak's greyscale above actually represents a reflectance of close to 20%. A true 18% reflectance would have a density of 0.745. So there's a discrepancy of about 1/7th of a stop. The camera also only indicates exposure times to the nearest 1/3rd stop, even if the exposure time is given more precisely - if those things worry anyone.