Any info on 4x10

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thought I recalled that David, but a look at the website does not show the darkslide...there is a 4x10 panoramic adapter (which I bet is the same thing) for $34.95, but could not find a picture or description of what it is. May just send an email to find out.

Here's the page with the picture--

http://www.benderphoto.com/4x10pa.htm

It's just a darkslide cut into an L-shape. I made mine from a cracked darkslide that I rescued from a friend who was about to use it for mixing plaster or something.

 

[mark]

Mark. . . Have you seen this web site?

http://www.jbhphoto.com/vcam/vcams.htm

Regards,

B.D.

Great site. Drool, drool.

Thanks folks for the info. This looks more and more doable.

 

[steve simmons]

Most, perhaps all, of these questions are answered in the Sept issue of View Camera.


steve simmons

 

[Ole]

Steve, the View Camera magazine is very difficult to get hold of in some parts of the world. I for one can't just walk into a bookstore and pick it up - I would have to order it specially from abroad.

The information given in discussions like this is far more valuable to me (and many others) than that which is printed in a magazine which is widely unavailable outside the USA.

 

[steve simmons]

In Europe View Camera can be obtained from Robert White in England.

sales@robertwhite.co.uk

View Camera is available anywhere in the world.

In Australia and Asia we have a distributor as well

info@mainlinephoto.com.au

 

[skillian]

I just replied to a similar question on the LF forum so I just copied and pasted it below:

I've been working for the last year on a photographic project consisting entirely of 4x10 contact prints. This is for a monograph I am publishing on the Great River Road (the road which follows the Mississippi River from its headwaters in MN to the Gulf). I had been happily making 8x10 contact prints when I tried using a split darkslide - immediately fell in love with the format and have been using it exclusively on this particular project.
The print size is just right to me - small enough to invite a closer look, but large enough to have a presence across the room. I also like being able to get twice as many photographs per film holder and per sheet when I develop film, etc... It makes it easier to travel with the 8x10 (which I often do by airplane) because I can get 16 shots out of only 4 holders.

I really don't see any significant downside to doing it this way. You do need to be careful when handling the film holders to keep track of the exposed half. I got into the habit very early to shoot the top half first and then the bottom to avoid double exposing them. You also have to remember to put in and remove the half slide - this may seem obvious, but it's an extra step that's easy to forget when you're used to just pulling a darkslide and exposing the film. I guess the only other possible downside could come from having a negative needing normal developent on the same sheet with a negative that needs N+. I avoid this by taking good notes in the field and simply grouping negatives needing each form of development. Otherwise, it's bullet proof. I've exposed at least 200 sheets of film this way with no problems.

If you already own an 8x10, making or buying a split darkslide is really no big deal so your best bet is simply to try it and decide for yourself. If you're thinking of buying a dedicated 4x10, I would recommend against it unless you're absolutely committed to the format. This requires buying special (expensive) film holders, cutting down film, etc... You're not saving much weight or space, so it just doesn't seem to make much sense to me when 8x10 cameras are so plentiful (and cheap, by comparison). You can also rotate your camera back on an 8x10 and do verticals, something not possible with a dedicated 4x10 camera.

Good luck. I have some 4x10's from my River Road project on my Website at www.scottkillian.com

 

[mark]

That was me too. You do have some nice images on your site.

 

[juan]

When you cut the 8x10 darkslide, how much are you allowing in overlap to separate the two images?
juan

 

[skillian]

Not much - 1/16 of an inch or even less.

 

[j_landecker]

Let's see, spend 25.00 and get a two part article on 4x10 cameras, lenses, etc. and have them as a permanent reference or don't spend 25.00 and potentially spend several hours on the interent and possibly not get as good and comprehensive info. You must like spending time on the computer and have unlimited free time.

steve simmons

Steve, I think people who are on APUG choose to come there and spend some time there and ask questions and participate in discussions because they find it informative and/or enjoyable. Many subscribe to APUG. Your comment is tactless and, frankly, rude. Thanks for ruining a good thread.

Jim

 

[Dave Wooten]

Nice work Scott (checked out your site) I find the cut dark slide works great and am using it on several formats.....am soon to try 14 x 17 to 8.5" x 14....got some extra slides from Sandy...

 

[j_landecker]

Let's see, spend 25.00 and get a two part article on 4x10 cameras, lenses, etc. and have them as a permanent reference or don't spend 25.00 and potentially spend several hours on the interent and possibly not get as good and comprehensive info. You must like spending time on the computer and have unlimited free time.

steve simmons

Hey, I've got another idea! I know this is probably a bit presumptuous of me, but I'd like to offer my suggestion to help Steve out in the marketing and public relations department here on APUG!

Ok, here's my go at it....

With a subscription to View Camera, which is only 25.00, you'll get an informative 2-part article on 4x10 cameras and lenses, as well as many more great articles throughout the year, delivered to your door. It'll be a great permanent reference of comprehensive information, and complement the discussions here on APUG and other internet forums. Why not give it a try?

There... and remember, it's just a friendly suggestion.

Jim

 

[steve simmons]

To Jim

My comment was directed at the individual who started this thread about 4x10. I pointed out there was an article that would answer many, perhaps all of his questions, and suggested he get a copy. His response was that there was not enough that interested him. It seems contradictory to me because it would save him a lot of time, and perhaps some or a lot of money, to have the article and the following one as reference. Having such an article, from whatever magazine, as a background could be very helpful. Comments on forums such as this are absolutley worthwhile but generally not as comprehensive as a 2,000+ word article with many photos as an additional source of info.

It is simply a matter of maximizing the amount of information. Information is power to the consumer.

steve simmons

 

[skillian]

Thanks Mark & Dave. Good luck trying this. It's actually quite easy - like finding a whole new camera living inside your 8x10. I found the opportunity to utilize an entirely different picture space to be very rewarding.

 

[Donald Miller]

For those who may be inclined to cut down an 8X10 darkslide, I just did one. I scored this using a very sharply pointed knife along a straight edge. It cut very easily with several passes. Sanding the edge with 600 grit paper finishes the job. I mention this because I think that trying to saw through a darkslide would probably chip the material.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I did mine just the way Donald did his. You might be able to saw it with a jeweler's saw like those flat fine saw blades that fit into a large X-Acto handle, but that can be a little harder to control.

 

[mark]

Sawing does chip. I used a carpet knife on my 5x7 and it worked perfect. Be patient though, and make lots of shallow cuts.

 

[Ole]

In Europe View Camera can be obtained from Robert White in England.

sales@robertwhite.co.uk

View Camera is available anywhere in the world.

In Australia and Asia we have a distributor as well

info@mainlinephoto.com.au

I'm not going to turn this into a discussion about View Camera Magazine, and I hope noone else will either. But I have o reply to this!

I said "difficult", not "impossible". While I live in Europe, there are a few extra difficulties with shipping from a country inside the EU (e.g. UK) to a country outside EU (e.g. Norway).

A few years I went to the trouble of aquiring four issues of the magazine to see if I would want to subscribe. I decided that at that price, it was simply not worth it. To me that issue you have been harping about would cost a lot more than $25!

 

[mikewhi]

I have a 4x10 back for my Canham 8x10. I got 4x10 holders from Keith directly (they were not cheap - $95 each for what is essentially a Fidelity holder). I recall buying HP5 and Bergger 4x10 film. Cutting down 8x10 is no big deal. Of course, all my 8x10 lenses covered the format, too.

As for the format, I liked it so much it got me inspired to get into 7x17 and I bought a Canham 7x17 adapter back for my 8x10. The 4x10 images are everything you expect and when the day comes, you'll be able to enlarge them easily.

I think Scott has some very nice images on his site taken with a 4x10. Also, one of the challenges with these panoramic formats is finding a way to use the format in a non-traditional way. Still-lifes, abstracts and portraits all present challenges with this format. It's easy to take a picture of a landscape with 4x10 because it so easily fits the eye, but it is much more rare to find interesting 4x10 images in these other categories.

-Mike

 

[skillian]

Mike,

Agreed - it is easy to fall into a rut with the "panoramic" aspect ratio and only make traditional landscape photographs. Many pictures I see with this format seem to fit that description. However, the biggest thing I like about this aspect ratio is the compression of vertical space - the ability to eliminate the horizon line altogether and explore forms in the foreground. I guess it's as much about what to "leave out" as it is what to "leave in".

 

[mikewhi]

Mike,

Agreed - it is easy to fall into a rut with the "panoramic" aspect ratio and only make traditional landscape photographs. Many pictures I see with this format seem to fit that description. However, the biggest thing I like about this aspect ratio is the compression of vertical space - the ability to eliminate the horizon line altogether and explore forms in the foreground. I guess it's as much about what to "leave out" as it is what to "leave in".

Yes, that is a nice part of a panoramic format, but for 4x10 it could also be done by cropping a 4x10 out of a full 8x10 negative. Shooting 4x10 directly is more economical, but the same image could be arrived at both ways. One of my personal approaches to the various formats (from square to panoramic and everything in between) is that I look at each as 'space to fill' - I hope I can explain this accurately.... That is, I don't think of a subject matter or problem and find a format to suit that subject matter or solve a compositional problem. Instead, I look at the shape of the format and I think of various ways to fill that space with a well-balanced and interesting composition. I adopted that approach when I started looking at 6x6 work done by Harry Callahan and I noticed how different square images were from 4x5\8x10 images. He filled the square space much differently than these other formats and he did it beauitfully (e.g. Water's Edge and the Elanor nudes). It was not a question of cropping a square image out of a 4x5, he approached the subject matter entirely differently with the square format.

So, what I was really trying to get at with 4x10 (and 7x17, etc) is how can that format's space be filled in interesting ways? Obviously, landscape pops right into mind and it's a great use of that format, no doubt about that. Having the sky pre-cropped is a big time saver<g>. I hope, over the coming year, to use the 7x17 (and maybe the minature 4x10<g>) formats in other ways, to fill their space with pleasing images that are not landscapes and yet fit into the panormaic format and not look contrived or that the image was forced into that format.

I have no problem with landscapes with panorama formats, don't get me wrong. I shoot them myself, but I want to work with other subject matter, too, in this format. I plan on doing cut-paper abstracts this fall with the 7x17 or 4x10 and also still-lifes. If I accomplish anything, I'll post them in my gallery.

-Mike

 

[ReallyBigCameras]

Mark,

Welcome to the wonderful world of the 4x10 format. I am a dedicated user and proponent (some would say "evangelist") of this lovely format that has been overlooked for far too long. In fact, I am the author of the article "4x10 - A Neglected Format Revisited, Part 1 of 2" that appears in the current issue of View Camera.

I don't wish to get into any sort of View Camera vs. APUG debate. I enjoy both as a form of sharing information, and am a big believer that printed media and electronic media each serve valuable roles and are destined to co-exist and even complement each other, rather than compete with each other. I know I personally am glad to have access to both and would be bitterly disappointed should either cease to exist.

That said, I will echo Steve's suggestion to try to obtain the current issue (at the very least - the next one may be of interest as well since it will contain Part 2 of 2). Over the years I have always tried to be very generous with sharing what I know in the online large format groups (many of the 4x10 comments you read on LFphoto.info are probably mine) . However, there is just so much time in the day and I can only contribute so much to the various online forums. The articles I write for View Camera are much more in depth than even my most long-winded online posts. For example, Part 1 of the View Camera article is over 5600 words in length, spanning six and a half pages and featuring eight photos - including a photo of every 4x10 camera on the market (and my custom made 4x10 camera, as well) and seven different brands of 4x10 film holders. I have been shooting 4x10 for eleven years and first proposed this article over two years ago. I have spent a lot of time testing 4x10 cameras, film holders and lenses. I have also used an 8x10 camera, with both a split darkslide and a slider board, for shooting two-up 4x10 on 8x10 film. This article is the culmination of my eleven years experience with the 4x10 format - what worked well for me, and equally important, what didn't. I just put the finishing touches on Part 2 and it's going to be an additional 4200 words in length. One of the things I enjoy about writing for View Camera is that Steve lets me write about topics that interest me personally, and then indulges me with generous editorial space to cover the topic in depth and not just scratch the surface.

I'm not trying to sell a magazine here (I'd like to see you buy it, but I don't get paid a commission), just trying to point out what you'd be missing out on. I'm also not trying to blow my own horn, just trying to point you to a source of information you may find useful. Finally, I'm definitely not trying to discourage discussing this topic here on APUG. In fact, quite the opposite - I encourage it and am glad to see others showing an interest in the 4x10 format. That is, after all, why I wrote the article in the first place.

Kerry

 

[Struan Gray]

A shopping tip for those with 4x10 holders. Silverprint in London (www.silverprint.co.uk) have 4" x 175 m rolls of Portra negative stock on clearance at just under £12 a roll.

 

[photomc]

Actually Kerry, I did get a subscription when I saw you were having a 2 part article on the 4x10...call me foolish, but there just aren't that many mags out there for us to get this kind of information and maybe I'm just not a picky as some are. Have to look for quite a while at the book stores for VC, and half the time it's not in plain site, so I had been thinking that since I finally dropped Outdoor Photographer (US) and most others (B&W-US and Emulison are the only subs I have right now). So, going to hold you to your word here - just kidding...look forward to the articles.

Mike

.....
I'm not trying to sell a magazine here (I'd like to see you buy it, but I don't get paid a commission), just trying to point out what you'd be missing out on. I'm also not trying to blow my own horn, just trying to point you to a source of information you may find useful. Finally, I'm definitely not trying to discourage discussing this topic here on APUG. In fact, quite the opposite - I encourage it and am glad to see others showing an interest in the 4x10 format. That is, after all, why I wrote the article in the first place.

Kerry

 

[ReallyBigCameras]

Actually Kerry, I did get a subscription when I saw you were having a 2 part article on the 4x10...

So, going to hold you to your word here - just kidding...look forward to the articles.

Mike

Mike,

I hope you enjoy the articles. I certainly had fun writing them. The 4x10 format is a personal favorite of mine, and I've wanted to write these articles for years. I'm glad I finally got around to doing it.

Are you currently shooting 4x10, or just thinking about getting started? As you can tell from this thread (and as discussed in Part 1 of the article) when it comes to 4x10, there is more than one way to get the job done. Whether you are using an 8x10 and cropping, using a slider board or a split darkslide, or have a dedicated 4x10 camera, it doesn't really matter. I've tried all ways and they each have their advantages and disadvantages. The 4x10 format has helped me see old, familiar subjects in new ways. It's been a fun adventure, and I plan to keep 4x10 for years to come.

Kerry