a brief theory of large format

[Robert Maxey]

Umm....
I'm late to the party, but what about wild eyebrows, bushy ear hair, and nose hair?
I'm asking for a friend.

You described my Uncle Bud. Sadly, he used a Kodak Instamatic.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

The 4th dimension is stress caused by the cost of the materials if you blow the shot after all the efort.

Naw ... in today's world, just find an amenable gallery owner and call it Art.

Bob

 

[MattKing]

You described my Uncle Bud. Sadly, he used a Kodak Instamatic.

Bob

I thought Bob's your uncle, but you say Bud's your uncle, and you are Bob.
I'm confused.

 

[BrianShaw]

I thought Bob's your uncle, but you say Bud's your uncle, and you are Bob.
I'm confused.

One of them must be from the opposing hemisphere… that’s the only logical explanation.

 

[grat]

I thought it was "this Bud's for you", and "Bob's your uncle", but since I'm the sibling of a primate's paternal unit......

 

[Robert Maxey]

I thought Bob's your uncle, but you say Bud's your uncle, and you are Bob.
I'm confused.

Yup, it is a kurious thing, indeed. It is like this: Uncle Bud is my uncle, and I am Bob who is my brother's kids uncle. Because I do not have any kids, nobody is my uncle. Although I do remember a long light in a rowboat and a certain lovely ballet dancer from a long time ago, so it is possible someone else is either my uncle or i am their uncle.

Bob's Your Uncle is an old phrase, but I am an old uncle. So it is likely that Bob's Your Uncle was written about me because he is, and I am as well.

My brain hurts.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

I thought Bob's your uncle, but you say Bud's your uncle, and you are Bob.
I'm confused.

I forgot to add, if Bob's your uncle, then we are related. Sorry, but it is just how it is.

Welcome to the family.

Bob

 

[BrianShaw]

I forgot to add, if Bob's your uncle, then we are related. Sorry, but it is just how it is.

Welcome to the family.

Bob

You might want to let Matt know what time supper is served!

 

[DREW WILEY]

Too damn complicated. Yes, materials wise, four times the surface area generally equates to four times the price per sheet of film. Otherwise, 8x10 shooting tends to be even slower and more contemplative than 4X5, so one tends to expose less frames, making the bigger camera equal or even cheaper to shoot than 4X5. The price of 8x10 color film is getting rather crazy, so I don't shoot that in my 8x10 nearly as often as I used to; but it's sure wonderful to work with in the darkroom. Lenses tend to be interchangeable except for small focal lengths with insufficient image circles for 8X10. Carry weight is of course significantly greater with 8x10 gear; but it will keep you in condition and spare you membership fees in some stinky indoor gym.
I love every camera I own, and every film format I use, but for slightly different reasons. One tends to handle scenes in a somewhat different manner using 8x10 instead of 4x5, especially with respect to depth of field logistics and challenges. But I find 8X10 and especially satisfying format.

 

[Vaughn]

Great. I forgot about plates.

Bob

And if the rumors are true, those photographers coating their own dry plates have to be careful since what they put in their pipes is still illegal in some states.

PS -- A great way to make an 8x10 camera easier to move around with and to handle is to haul an 11x14 on your back for awhile. The 5x7 seems like a dang P&S.

 

[KenS]

At what point can I use my pipe?

Bob

Once (and ONLY) you have come out from under the dark-cloth [it works MUCH SO MUCH BETTER for ME ANYWAY]

Ken

 

[Vaughn]

I thought about using a snorkel under the darkcloth in below freezing weather to prevent icing up of the GG and my glasses. One could design a darkcloth with a hole for the snorkel.
But that might be a prisonable offense in North Dakota.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Some ice fishermen use snorkels. I tried all kinds of things including a special wax on the groundglass marketed to prevent ski goggles from fogging. It didn't do much. Once I brought along a plastic windshield scraper. Mostly I just held my breath under the darkcloth at low temperatures while composing, and momentarily "resurfaced" like a seal or whale to get a gulp of air, and went back under to complete the focusing. Now my solution is simply to be older and lazier, so less prone to go out into miserably cold conditions. Or maybe I'm saying that because I just recently repeated my annual ritual of viewing Fargo, a favorite movie of mine. Moral of that story - never put your view camera in the wood chipper head first, especially if it has a red bellows.

 

[removed account4]

8x10 for the contact print

Unless you want a larger print. An 8x10 enlarger is not something found in most darkrooms, pro or amateur. Even a contact print can be tricky.

that's why they make 5x7film and an omega e4

 

[Robert Maxey]

8x10 for the contact print

that's why they make 5x7film and an omega e4

True. But, 8x10 is simply better, all else being equal. If I wanted a smaller film size, I would use 5x7. No room for one of these
:

 

[PerTulip]

...
Bald and no beard: Minox
Regular head of hair, partial balding: 35mm / 120
Regular head of hair and stubble: 4x5
Partial head of hair and 4" beard: 5x7 / 8x10

What about 11x14 and Cirkit Cameras, like a No. 16? A head shrink or two, perhaps?

Bob

Toupet: digital?

 

[Robert Maxey]

Toupet: digital?

Well, first man had hair then it was improved with the introduction of the Toupet. Man first had film, then things improved due to digital. Seem to fit. Toupet it is.

Bob

 

[DREW WILEY]

Well, I worked with a bald guy who wanted to look younger, so had a nylon artificial hair transplant around the age of 40. It looked reasonably real back then, nice n shiny black. But it might be rather unnerving when he reaches the old folks home, and everyone else is either gray, white-haired, or themselves bald. Yep, just like digital. Look at it long enough, and something seems off.

 

[removed account4]

True. But, 8x10 is simply better, all else being equal.

not necessarily better .. all things being equal to what ?
I shoot 11x14 is that better than 8x10 all else being equal ?

 

[Robert Maxey]

not necessarily better .. all things being equal to what ?
I shoot 11x14 is that better than 8x10 all else being equal ?

Yes, all things being equal. A 16 x 20 is better, all else being equal. A No. 16 Cirkit is better if you need such a huge image and eventually, it becomes ridiculous and impracticable.

Bob

 

[abruzzi]

Well, I worked with a bald guy who wanted to look younger, so had a nylon artificial hair transplant around the age of 40. It looked reasonably real back then, nice n shiny black. But it might be rather unnerving when he reaches the old folks home, and everyone else is either gray, white-haired, or themselves bald. Yep, just like digital. Look at it long enough, and something seems off.

The truly sad thing is that the inventor of the spray on toupée just died recently--Ron Popiel. So if I use spray on hair, which camera should I use?

 

[BrianShaw]

The truly sad thing is that the inventor of the spray on toupée just died recently--Ron Popiel. So if I use spray on hair, which camera should I use?

https://m.dpreview.com/news/9122234525/rollei-returns-with-the-new-rolleiflex-instant-kamera-tlr

 

[DREW WILEY]

You know the saying - If you're going to do something, do it big. Get a Don King wig; Or if female, Marie Antoinette set the precedent (just bring along a spare head itself).

 

[Robert Maxey]

The truly sad thing is that the inventor of the spray on toupée just died recently--Ron Popiel. So if I use spray on hair, which camera should I use?

Something more embarrassing like the spray on hair. Let us see ... How about something Hello Kitty themed.

Bob

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I have an 11x14” camera, and I’m not convinced it’s better than 8x10”. It’s interesting to have the big camera out occasionally and look at the world upside down on the big groundglass, and it makes interesting portraits, but it definitely feels like maybe I’ve passed the point of diminishing returns, as DOF is even shorter, it takes more chemistry, forces the print size to 11x14”, takes more room for everything to dry, and the negs and prints require more storage space and a bigger wastebasket, and I can’t take as much film into the field, because the holders are bigger and substantially more expensive, not to mention the cost of film. Maybe if I lived in a big house with lots of wall space to fill up, I’d be more interested in formats larger than 8x10”.

7x17” is another story, because some subjects lend themselves to panoramic formats, and that feels like the panoramic counterpart to 8x10”, but my 7x17” Korona is overdue for a bellows replacement.