35 foot camera...6 foot high negatives. WOW

[Colin Corneau]

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local/mathie&id=8543975

sorry about the little commercial at the start, there. But what a story...it would be a real experience to see these images in person. Bravo to this guy.

 

[zsas]

Whoa a local guy!!!! I need to pay a visit!!

 

[Dennis S]

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Dave R.]

Now that's Large Format!

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I wonder if the camera can be hand held?

Jeff

 

[bsdunek]

Wonder where he gets the film? Also wonder how it's processed. All very interesting, but not very practical for most of us.

 

[johnielvis]

there's a 2 pager in "chicago social" magazine...he lives just over the river from me...

oh AND he needs 8 million bucks to do his project. Channel 11 is thinking of sponsoring him so they can do a documentary of the project.

 

[CGW]

More, maybe better, coverage and backstory here:

http://blog.popflys.com/2012/01/29/35ft-camera/

 

[Colin Corneau]

With respect, that link didn't add very much and the guy's a foul mouthed jerk, to boot.

This is an incredible amount of work and dedication, but you'd never know it by the blogger's flippant attitude. Forgive me if I missed an "inside joke" here but...jeez. "Just going to be huge prints of Americans"...I'm Canadian and I think that's disrespectful.

 

[CGW]

With respect, that link didn't add very much and the guy's a foul mouthed jerk, to boot.

This is an incredible amount of work and dedication, but you'd never know it by the blogger's flippant attitude. Forgive me if I missed an "inside joke" here but...jeez. "Just going to be huge prints of Americans"...I'm Canadian and I think that's disrespectful.

The blogger's a rude little oik, true, but it's the video downpage where the "American Portrait Project" is explained in depth. Try that and ignore the text, OK?

 

[johnielvis]

yes--there ARE videos for the project--I read that in the article but it didn't give a website for the project. They DID mention kickstarter, so maybe the links are there? There are supposedly more than one video.

Hey--that blog dude did have the negative sizes...if he's right that thing is, technically, a 645!

 

[Brian C. Miller]

Kickstarter: Dead Link Removed

Here's the reward levels which include prints:
Gold Reward: 18" x 24" Giclee Fine-Art Print
Platinum: 30"x40” Giclee Fine-Art Print
Diamond: 4-foot by 5-foot "Autumn's Eye" (Left and Right) Giclee Fine-Art Print
Big Camera: Giclee Museum Quality Fine Art Print of "Christina In Distress"
Super Big Camera: 16-foot print from the big camera on weatherproof canvas
Super-Sized Negative: 6-foot by 4.5-foot Project Negative
(emphasis added)

At no time does he mention that he's ever going to produce a real print enlargement from the project.

 

[Marco B]

I think this page of the somewhat pretentiously called "The Foundation for the Preservation of American Culture", as seems to have been setup specifically for this project, is the most interesting one:

http://thefpac.org/videos.html

Note also the actual travel camera does NOT have a functional groundglass back, instead, the ground glass and negative stage are inside the bellows, where the photographer will be, and the fake ground glass on the back seems to be used as live electronic plasma display showing what is going on inside the bellows...:

[video=vimeo;27359714]http://vimeo.com/27359714[/video]

 

[johnielvis]

no wonder he needs 8 million bucks--hydraulics to open and close it--actuators for remote focusing, big plasma screens.

To tell the truth, that design is that problem, but how else can you create "sensation" among the public? If the guy just built a camera obscura out of a shipping container that can be schlepped around on a truck, well, THAT wouldn't be worth taking your eyes off your twitterboxes for, now would it?

Good luck to him, hey, ANYthing that brings regular photography, and what it is capable of doing, to the attention of the masses is ok in my book.

 

[Brian C. Miller]

Well, like Manarchy said, it'll be like the circus coming into town.

Here's a thought: at a 35ft length, for a headshot with everything in focus, six feet high, what aperture is that for that DOF? Something just doesn't quite add up for that. I've poked around on the macro calculators, and it's just that somehow this isn't making sense to actually need a 35ft camera.

Lens Magnification and Depth of Field Calculator
Focal length: 480mm
Focusing distance: 2m
Extension: 1575mm (about 5ft)
f/stop: 90
--------
Magnification: 3.9:1
And you'd have 200mm of DOF.

The prototype camera in his studio is much shorter than 35ft, and that's what he's using to make the current negatives. So, the actual camera is well under 10ft, and the rest is dark space.

 

[michaelbsc]

Well, like Manarchy said, it'll be like the circus coming into town.

Here's a thought: at a 35ft length, for a headshot with everything in focus, six feet high, what aperture is that for that DOF? Something just doesn't quite add up for that. I've poked around on the macro calculators, and it's just that somehow this isn't making sense to actually need a 35ft camera.

I think the *PLATFORM* is 35ft from end to end. The camera proper is not going to defy the laws of optics. But it is all about the hype and the show.

 

[John Austin]

Engagement

To me the crucial part of this huge camera project is the fact Dennis Manarchy, anything but anarchy, spends two days with his subject to make the exposure - To me subject engagement is the most crucial aspect of photography - Added to engagement is a technique so deeply ingrained it works automatically, like strands in a rope, one strengthening the other

I digress - All APUGists, apart from the despicable camera collectors, can learn from the engagement aspect of this project

I wish to sponsor this project at whatever level I can, as an age pensioner only $25 or so, but if lots of us put into this project we might help it to fruition

John
new call sign to be Grumpy Old Man

 

[removed account4]

8 million dollars, is kind of funny, at least he is getting a lot of FREE PRESS

i don't really think speding a few days with his sitters is engaging anymore than spending 20mins.
good portrait photographers don't NEED to spend 2 or 3 days to engage with their subjects ...

john chiara has been doing something similar for a whlle now ...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

although he doesn't do 6' negatives ( are they rephotographed a smaller format ? or ??? to get the prints )
chiara's are ilfochromes ... and analog!

 

[John Austin]

Oooops - There must be something wrong with me then, my best work with people, especially naked ones, happens after a few years of knowing and photographing them - That is how my best pics come except for the rare "gift" images

 

[removed account4]

there is a huge difference between 2 days and 2 years.
in 2 days the subject hasn't taken down the facade
that he or she would take down after 2 years.
2 days is pretty much the same as an hour or two ...
photographing nudes requires the subject to trust the photographer
a deadpan portrait doesn't require the same trust ...

8million dollars, a walk in bellows, lcd/plasma screen, giant ink jet prints
it sounds to me that it is more about 20seconds of fame and a gallery show ...

i can see if he was annie L and needed a helicopter and 45person entourage ...

 

[John Austin]

PS - The precursor

Does anyone remember in which books the "Railroad Camera" was mentioned? - I mean this one, the image of which I have stolen from Photo.net, but no apologies as it looks like it was previously stolen to go on Photo.net



Regarding the post above, even my professional environmental and arts documentation, in state and federal gov't collections in Australia, was better the longer I spent on the project and the more I knew the landscapes and people involved - Also, I do not photograph "art nudes" - My new work is strong naked portraits of strong beautiful women and the best images are coming from women in their 40s and 50s, with 10x8' negs celebrating their textural history - (The exhibition of these is booked for Fremantle, Western Australia in March 2014)

Also, I thought the figure requested on the Manarchy website is US$50,000, which seems very reasonable for the project - I have no way of understanding $8 million dollars, those sort of figures become meaningless to me - There is a big precedent for this kind of funding in the work of Christo, but he has had that aspect of his work wrapped up for a long time

New callsign to be
Grumpy Old Man

 

[michaelbsc]

I thought about through Railroad Camera. The idea behind it was that the photo had to be a contact print for the PAris fair.

 

[ic-racer]

Looks like something you might have your picture take with at Disney World. The guys over at DPUG are working on something similar...

 

[mollypix]

fiml supply

Anybody any idea where I can get film in this size and who makes it?

 

[Brian C. Miller]

Welcome to the forum! Are you thinking about building one of these?

I'm guessing that you'd either talk to Simon R Galley (of Ilford) on the board here, or else contact Keith Canham at Canham Cameras for a Kodak special order.

The Kodak special order is a minumum $15,000.