"quality" of course can be used rather more in the sense of "attribute", which is how I often use it myself; perhaps this is also Matt's use.
I agree, Dan. 135 format excels at a few things... very close macro and very long shots being two of them.
I'm sorry, but that's not what I said.
I said nothing about long focus lenses.
And I said that I went up to 2x3 to do better than more-or-less the best possible with 35 mm for some kinds of closeup shots.
My 2x3 and, now, 612 gear is absolutely useless with moving subjects, especially closeup. This because of how it works, not because of format. Focus, compose, close shutter, stop down, cock shutter, insert film holder, pull dark slide, take exposure is much slower than focus, compose, shoot. A Leica on a Focuslide would be nearly as bad as my larger format gear.
Where 35 mm beats the 2x3 and 6x12 gear I use is in speed and ease of setting up. Portability, too. For some shots an SLR is best. As I said, what I want is an FM2 scaled up to shoot 2x3. Fat chance of that.
I have made more good pictures with Diana & Holga cameras than large format. Partly because they are more fun to use.
Jon
Which qualities are emphasized by larger film and the slow and careful attitude? Certainly not spontaneity.
ha that reminds of ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXzFp1lshBE
a lot of folks. believe when they increase or decrease film size their quality increases ( or decreases ).
the same can be said for lack of control ( holga, box cameras, pinholes &C).
do you honestly believe you can take better photographs with your diana than your ebony 11x14or better photographs woth your spotomatic than with your clack?
and why?
Fair enough, pdeeh. I'm not trying to "control" your choices... only "influence" them. If you weren't looking for opinions then why start this thread? If you want to shoot and contact 8x10" then that's your choice. Personally, I don't want to bother with small prints and don't want to bother with anything smaller than 40x50". That's my choice. My point is that 135 and 6x7cm format are more than capable of outstanding quality 8x10" enlargements. I can't fathom, in the depths of my feeble mind, why anyone would wrestle with sheet film (especially 8x10) just to make 8x10" prints. If limited DOF and smooth bokeh are the goals then buy fast lenses and shoot them wide open.
Why would you want to make 8x10 prints from an 8x10 negative? Have you ever seen an 8x10 contact print? Or any contact print from any size sheet film for that matter? All enlargement, no matter the film format and no matter the size of the enlargement, will degrade the image quality through loss of sharpness and contrast. That can of course be mitigated by a skillful darkroom printer, but nonetheless, it is fact. Go look at some 8x10 contact prints some time and you'll see the snap and sparkle you won't see from an enlargement.
Careful taking procedures along with excellent equipment plus the right enlarging equipment and techniques produce excellent results. Yes, I've seen 8x10 and 11x14 contact prints. They can be very nice but, IMO, they're not worth carrying all that heavy bulky gear just to make small contact prints. IMO... and it's only my opinion... that's a waste of effort. Now... if you were shooting 16x20 and the prints could be viewed up close that might be a different story. Again... just my opinion.
I didn't say you can't produce excellent results from enlargements of small(er) negatives. I'm just saying that, in answer to your question, a lot of large format camera users do feel the effort required to use those cameras to produce contact prints is worth the effort. Myself included.
At 12x20 or 16x20 I might agree... if viewed at pixel-peeping (grain-peeping) distance... but not viewing 8x10 prints. IMHO, contact printing to 8x10 is silly.
Sometimes final result just looks better from those plastic toys:
Diana F (Fomapan 400 in Rodinal):
Dead Link Removed
Nikon F3 (Technical pan in Technidol):
Dead Link Removed
We will agree to disagree, then. You are entitled to your opinion, but that it doesn't work for you doesn't outweigh the fact that for many others, it does work.
a lot of folks. believe when they increase or decrease film size their quality increases ( or decreases ).
the same can be said for lack of control ( holga, box cameras, pinholes &C).
do you honestly believe you can take better photographs with your diana than your ebony 11x14or better photographs woth your spotomatic than with your clack?
and why?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?