good opportunity to get into LF?

[Bob S]

I choose to post in this thread because I went to LF once and left it. But it still fascinates me as the meditation almost process.
What I learned; just like with MF and 135, gear is not this important:
I did it with Calumet Cadet and three Graflex.
What I found be extremely difficult is to get same decent photography I sometimes able to get with MF and 135.
I looked at LF and 4x5 groups at Flickr for two evenings. 40+K photos and none of them was motivating.
Collodion makes all photos looks the same, same special effect and limitations makes all of the portraits looks the same. I was not even able to find decent regular print of the landscape among thousands of LF photos.
It is not the Flickr; I follow several good film photogs with interesting prints:
But none of them are with LF:

Ever look at John Sexton, Anne Larson, Bruce Barnbaum work?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Ever look at John Sexton, Anne Larson, Bruce Barnbaum work?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sexton/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24135249@N02/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/iipimages/36798296523

Flickr result for those three.

Sorry, I'm afraid I have to repeat it for you. I see decent photography on Flickr with 135 and MF, but next to none with LF.
To me it seems what LF gives too much struggle or limitations for an amateur. While 135 and MF are not.
As an amateur this is what I'm afraid of.

 

[Bob S]

Then you don’t understand what camera movements can do.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

So, it is me and of seventeen+ thousands photogs on Flickr who doesn't understand.

Fair enough.

 

[winger]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sexton/ - That is likely NOT the John Sexton that Bob S. meant.

There are some decent LF shots on Flickr, but the LF forum is a better place to find them.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sexton/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24135249@N02/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/iipimages/36798296523

Flickr result for those three.

Sorry, I'm afraid I have to repeat it for you. I see decent photography on Flickr with 135 and MF, but next to none with LF.
To me it seems what LF gives too much struggle or limitations for an amateur. While 135 and MF are not.
As an amateur this is what I'm afraid of.

Pretty much all my images on flickr are with 8x10. No struggle or limitations whatsoever.

 

[jim10219]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sexton/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24135249@N02/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/iipimages/36798296523

Flickr result for those three.

Sorry, I'm afraid I have to repeat it for you. I see decent photography on Flickr with 135 and MF, but next to none with LF.
To me it seems what LF gives too much struggle or limitations for an amateur. While 135 and MF are not.
As an amateur this is what I'm afraid of.

It's not for you then. Honestly, it's not for most people. It's expensive. It's slow. It's immobile. It rewards skill, not luck. It's the equivalent of a formula one car with racing slicks. In the hands of the right person, it can produce amazing results that will blow anything else away. In the hands of the average person, it's a crash machine.

Not that the average person couldn't learn to use one. They're not so difficult as to be beyond what the average person could figure out. It just takes a little more mental energy and patience.

 

[awty]

Lf is not going to make you are better photographer, only talent and hard work will get you that,, about the only ones who will care if you are using LF are other who use LF, as long as you realise that then go ahead and get into it, its fun and anything that gets you out making pictures is a good thing.
I have cameras from 35mm through to 14x17 variety is the spice of life.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

OK. I registered on LFF. Many photos are hosted on Flickr and re-posted on LFF.
I was trying to find interesting picture on the Landscapes and urban landscapes threads. I gave up too quickly, perhaps.
I'm still not getting it. Some of the pictures looks like they were taken with mobile phones and some of them I would even not bother to take, here is nothing interesting on them at all.
Maybe I miss something or something is missing in those threads at LFF. I have odd feeling it should be much more pictures in those threads.
It looks like people just enjoining free time and the LF process.
Maybe LF is lost in the past format. I like old LF photos available on Flickr Commons (Archives and Museums).
Or maybe it is only very few people who could really make it stand out. Like those three names mentioned earlier here. And some other big names.
Or I just don't understand LF as media at all. I kind of get Joel Meyerowitz on RF, but his LF is not my cap of tea...
But I really like LF as the gear. It came as first photography tool and it will be here after all other film formats will vanish....

 

[odell1618photography]

Who is “MAC” please?

 

[Ian C]

Regarding the question of post #35:

MAC in White Pains, New York, was originally the Mamiya America Corporation, now known as the MAC Group. It handles US distribution of a variety of brands, including Toyo, but no longer handles Mamiya products.

https://www.macgroupus.com/LeftMenu/AboutUs/OurBrands.aspx

https://www.macgroupus.com/LeftMenu/AboutUs/CorporateHistory.aspx

Also see “Mamiya America Corporation” in the article found by the following link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamiya

 

[Bob S]

It's not for you then. Honestly, it's not for most people. It's expensive. It's slow. It's immobile. It rewards skill, not luck. It's the equivalent of a formula one car with racing slicks. In the hands of the right person, it can produce amazing results that will blow anything else away. In the hands of the average person, it's a crash machine.

Not that the average person couldn't learn to use one. They're not so difficult as to be beyond what the average person could figure out. It just takes a little more mental energy and patience.

Wrong Sexton

 

[jim10219]

OK. I registered on LFF. Many photos are hosted on Flickr and re-posted on LFF.
I was trying to find interesting picture on the Landscapes and urban landscapes threads. I gave up too quickly, perhaps.
I'm still not getting it. Some of the pictures looks like they were taken with mobile phones and some of them I would even not bother to take, here is nothing interesting on them at all.
Maybe I miss something or something is missing in those threads at LFF. I have odd feeling it should be much more pictures in those threads.
It looks like people just enjoining free time and the LF process.
Maybe LF is lost in the past format. I like old LF photos available on Flickr Commons (Archives and Museums).
Or maybe it is only very few people who could really make it stand out. Like those three names mentioned earlier here. And some other big names.
Or I just don't understand LF as media at all. I kind of get Joel Meyerowitz on RF, but his LF is not my cap of tea...
But I really like LF as the gear. It came as first photography tool and it will be here after all other film formats will vanish....

I'm starting to get the impression that you're just trying to knock large format down without understanding what it is. Like you have this impression in your mind that it's this super exclusive club that you're not allowed into, so you're trying to cut it down to prove that the LF club is not as cool as they think they are.
There's no club. It's just a tool. Most LF photographers, including myself, have tons of cameras in all different formats. We don't generally divide cameras into good and bad categories, or consider one format superior to another, but rather just enjoy each type for what it does best. I tend to shoot mostly LF and FF digital because those formats fit my style and workflow best. I still really enjoy shooting 135 and 120 from time to time, but for the majority of my work, LF and FF digital make the most sense. I choose the tool that fits the job, not the other way around.

 

[Jim Jones]

Trying to appreciate LF photography on a computer screen is like trying to appreciate a symphony on a clock radio. I admit to doing both when it is that or nothing.

 

[Bob S]

Go look at Clyde Butcher’s work.

 

[Sirius Glass]

OK. I registered on LFF. Many photos are hosted on Flickr and re-posted on LFF.
I was trying to find interesting picture on the Landscapes and urban landscapes threads. I gave up too quickly, perhaps.
I'm still not getting it. Some of the pictures looks like they were taken with mobile phones and some of them I would even not bother to take, here is nothing interesting on them at all.
Maybe I miss something or something is missing in those threads at LFF. I have odd feeling it should be much more pictures in those threads.
It looks like people just enjoining free time and the LF process.
Maybe LF is lost in the past format. I like old LF photos available on Flickr Commons (Archives and Museums).
Or maybe it is only very few people who could really make it stand out. Like those three names mentioned earlier here. And some other big names.
Or I just don't understand LF as media at all. I kind of get Joel Meyerowitz on RF, but his LF is not my cap of tea...
But I really like LF as the gear. It came as first photography tool and it will be here after all other film formats will vanish....

Look at the details, the tonality, ... but what you see on the computer screen is like looking through lumpy shower glass. You need to see the results directly.

 

[destroya]

Look at the details, the tonality, ... but what you see on the computer screen is like looking through lumpy shower glass. You need to see the results directly.

yep. thats how I plan to check my lenses and camera. Im gonna shoot some foma 100, develop the film as slides and use a loop onmy light box to verify my focus and technique. hoping I can make it work for me.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Go look at Clyde Butcher’s work.

Again, please, try to understand! I do have Yosuf Karsh book. I read about him and all of the aspects of his work with LF: Like several books.
I read how Ansel Adams was taking it.

My observations are about amateur LF photography. I know plenty of amateurs with decent photography with 135 and MF. With LF I have seen next to none so far.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Look at the details, the tonality, ... but what you see on the computer screen is like looking through lumpy shower glass. You need to see the results directly.

I did printed 4x5 negatives under enlarger. This is something which wasn't very difficult for me to achieve with LF.
I do struggle to get decent shot in terms of the content with LF. I'm not good on portraits, my taste for landscapes is weird. I just like LF as the process and the appeal of the gear.
Maybe I should try what I like to see from the glory time of LF... Kind of documentary. I go on local events with Leica.

 

[Rod Klukas]

The Toyo 45a is a wonderful camera. However, you are embarking on an expensive venture. if you are happy with medium format I am not sure why you would switch. 4x5 is more expensive and far less convenient that medium format roll film. Shooting roll film with the Toyo 45a is not an improvement in convenience or cost over your medium format camera. It is doubtful that your pictures will be better. More expensive and far more things to go wrong. I'd stick with medium format and put my efforts into composition and other aspects of picture taking that will improve the pictures rather than changing to 4x5.

Just my opinion.

The movements make a huge difference.

 

[Bob S]

Rod, you going to PhotoPlus?

 

[Sirius Glass]

The movements make a huge difference.

Not if one is shooting hand held.

 

[awty]

By the time you set up the C1 8x10 for street photography its getting dark and everyones gone home and nobody stays still long enough for f64 anyhow.
I marvel at Alfred Stieglitz. Fifth Avenue, not only did he get an action shot, but he did it in the snow, guess they were tough back then..

 

[Bob S]

By the time you set up the C1 8x10 for street photography its getting dark and everyones gone home and nobody stays still long enough for f64 anyhow.
I marvel at Alfred Stieglitz. Fifth Avenue, not only did he get an action shot, but he did it in the snow, guess they were tough back then..
View attachment 229971

Ever see the picture of Ty Cobb stealing 3rd base? That was done hand held with a 45 SLR! How about Jackie Robinson stealing home? That was done hand held with a 45! How about those old boxing pictures at ringside? 45 hand held!

It’s experience and technique. They go hand in hand!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ever see the picture of Ty Cobb stealing 3rd base? That was done hand held with a 45 SLR! How about Jackie Robinson stealing home? That was done hand held with a 45! How about those old boxing pictures at ringside? 45 hand held!

It’s experience and technique. They go hand in hand!

Now we can talk about the advantages and disadvantages for handheld 4"x5" press cameras and Graflexes.