High rate of print-worthy pictures with MF

Frank Dean,  Blacksmith

A
Frank Dean, Blacksmith

  • 9
  • 5
  • 81
Woman wearing shades.

Woman wearing shades.

  • 1
  • 1
  • 84
Curved Wall

A
Curved Wall

  • 6
  • 0
  • 98
Crossing beams

A
Crossing beams

  • 10
  • 1
  • 120

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,842
Messages
2,781,741
Members
99,725
Latest member
saint_otrott
Recent bookmarks
0

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,364
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
It's interesting that some people seem to think that shooting 35mm means less seriousness or care somehow. I haven't found this to be true. In one photo walk some 35mm exposures happen rapidly for me, say in a couple of seconds or even zone focused from the hip, and other exposures are laborious and slow while I look for the best shot. The format has nothing to do with it.

No, not necessarily shooting 35mm more casually, which I do tend to do, but since the view finder is smaller I just tend to expend less effort in detail. Especially because another photograph or two is not expensive.
 

grat

Member
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
2,044
Location
Gainesville, FL
Format
Multi Format
Now, with digital, I see shooters who take a 3-frame series for EVERY shot taken...I was standing in line to get into the Paris catacombs, and saw this happening by a shooter standing next in line with friends! After all, 'digital shot is free'.

For something like that, HDR stacking / exposure bracketing makes sense. If you have the tool, it makes sense to use it.
 

wiltw

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
6,450
Location
SF Bay area
Format
Multi Format
For something like that, HDR stacking / exposure bracketing makes sense. If you have the tool, it makes sense to use it.

Yes, there is a real valid purpose for most every feature. But being not on tripod, and with changing background detail and with a moving subject also to contend with, things like HDR become difficult.
 

wiltw

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
6,450
Location
SF Bay area
Format
Multi Format
No, not necessarily shooting 35mm more casually, which I do tend to do, but since the view finder is smaller I just tend to expend less effort in detail. Especially because another photograph or two is not expensive.

You said it.
 

gone

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2009
Messages
5,504
Location
gone
Format
Medium Format
Horses for courses.

It's because MF film is expensive to buy and process, you get way less shots on a roll, and is expensive to print in a darkroom (you have to buy a MF enlarger if all you do is 35mm). The paper sizes seldom match the format too, so that gets expensive w/ paper waste.

All this means that a MF shot is usually more of a more thought out approach, and if one takes their time to study the composition out (or even decides it's not worth it), sure, that gives you a better keeper ratio. There's a cause and effect for everything, that's how it is.

Format matters, and it will affect the keeper ratio, at least for me. For someone else, well, that's their thing. Besides, I figure a 35mm camera is a much more capable and versatile tool than a MF camera, especially if it has AE and motorized film advance. You will never in a million years be able to take the kind of shots you get w/ a full featured SLR using any MF camera on the planet. And if I get only 1 keeper on a 36 exp roll (for example), it's darned sure a photo that can't even be got w/ a MF camera, and never, ever w/ a LF format.
 
Last edited:

Pieter12

Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Messages
7,597
Location
Magrathean's computer
Format
Super8
It's interesting that some people seem to think that shooting 35mm means less seriousness or care somehow. I haven't found this to be true. In one photo walk some 35mm exposures happen rapidly for me, say in a couple of seconds or even zone focused from the hip, and other exposures are laborious and slow while I look for the best shot. The format has nothing to do with it.
I'll have to agree with that, I think shooting MF is easier to compose, but a 35 RF is pretty much the way to go for more spontaneous shots. In the hands of someone like Lewis Baltz, 35mm can easily be mistaken for LF.
 

Arthurwg

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
2,681
Location
Taos NM
Format
Medium Format
I think finding your subject matter has something to do with it. If you find it in abundance, know what you are after and are competent with your equipment you will have a higher success rate. For Lewis Baltz, a photographer who I greatly admire, his subjects were narrowed down to exactly what he was after and his technique was narrowed to a few simple but strict rules.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,947
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
I can see the results much easier on the MF contact proof sheets.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
13,934
Format
8x10 Format
Hmmm .... MF (6X7 and 6X9) is the smallest format I print (35mm only rarely, maybe once a year). It's all relative. Big, bigger, biggest, biggester .... Logistical issues are one thing; but when it comes to the darkroom, the bigger the better. But yeah, a 6x9 RF can sometimes to be a handy quick shot accessory to throw in the pack atop the 8x10. And since gravity is a function of time, and I'm already 72, I'm certainly glad I upped my own arsenal of MF gear.
 
Last edited:

warden

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
3,042
Location
Philadelphia
Format
Medium Format
I confess I've never thought much about keeper rates with my photography.

When I'm out in the city it's about the enjoyment of it, the seeing, the composing, the not-getting-mugged, etc, and if I get a nice picture out of it that's great too. My walks take a couple of hours and I never spend more money than a trip to a movie theater with popcorn, and photography is more enjoyable than the movie anyway. I'm no pro so if I've had fun, that's a win.

Here's when I do think about keeper ratio: each year I line up all the neighborhood kids for back yard portraits (Hasselblad/D3200) and if I shoot a bad roll or the mood isn't right on the negatives I have to invite the rugrat back for a reshoot which is a PITA. There are too many kids on my street now, and the word has spread that I'm the neighborhood portrait guy so I notice the expenditure: (12 rolls of D3200 and darkroom prints for everyone each year, and my darkroom "skills" mean I go through a lot of paper too.) But they're all good friends and it's an excuse to drink wine and hang out while I snap the little ones. I'm in my seventh year of portraits and they're kinda' priceless now to me, but damn I want a better keeper ratio for this one facet of my art life. ;-)
 

Slixtiesix

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 31, 2006
Messages
1,407
Format
Medium Format
My observation as well. My explanation would be that the bigger viewfinder allows for more careful composition. On the other hand, I also have a high rate of keepers with my Agfa Isola. So I guess the viewfinder is not the answer. Maybe it is the format ratio?
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
I think the negatives are bigger of course they are better!
that and you probably took most of your 10,000 photographs that
were supposed to be "less good" with a small format camera ..
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
9,459
Location
New Jersey formerly NYC
Format
Multi Format
Keeper rates for what purpose? When I shot 35mm, it was often on a vacation or a party or get-together. I was taken a lot of handheld pictures of the journey. The best prints went into an album. The keeper rate was fairly high let;s say 200 out of 700 shots. Today, trips are done with a digital camera. Same procedure as with 35mm only I make digital slide shows. Same keeper rate of the show. When I shoot MF film, it's always with a tripod and only to get artsy photos. So of course there will be a bigger keeper rate.
 
Last edited:

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,753
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
I only think about the price of film when I'm buying film. When I'm using film, I'm much more concerned about running out of film. So, I'll be more selective using 120 film. I'm more selective with large format because of the need to set up the camera (tripod, focusing, etc.). But the photos I've taken that I like best were all on 35mm film - because that's what I had.
I also have a bad habit of forgetting to compensate for bellows extension with large format. I even tell myself beforehand "don't forget" then immediately forget. Infrequent practise, I guess.
 

drmoss_ca

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
462
Format
Multi Format
Leaving out focus-stacking and suchlike, it seems obvious we will spend more time thinking and planning, more care overall, with more expensive film formats. That doesn't surprise me.

What does surprise me is how liberating it becomes to enjoy film photography at half-price with a half-frame camera. To mangle HCB's quote "I see a thing, I take a picture". Sure, there is still a neurological moment where one imagine what the image will be when it gets onto paper, but there is so much less deliberation and so much more spontaneity. I wish I had the innate skill and ability for this to result in great things! As it is, I simply enjoy taking out a camera for a walk and snapping away. Very likely I'll still have two printables per roll.
 

Deleted member 88956

To mangle HCB's quote "I see a thing, I take a picture".
His keeper rate was extremely low, but he could afford countless rolls of film, neve bother with processing, in a sense, he was the pioneer of digital photography. But I hope this thread did not mean to be about HCB.

As for the thread itself, it's been stated already, there is no way for MF camera to keep pace with 35mm, for lack of ease of bringing it up to take a shot, to being much more conservative in choosing a shot. The latter partly due to fewer frames available, partly because of much more inviting (to careful composition) finder's view, and partly due to processing (but that is more in tune with "keeper rate" mentality and desire to make the most out of every frame.

That "keeper rate" is more and more built into our format's "mind set", the larger it gets the fewer throw-aways we work for.

Having said all that, there is a bunch of subjects 35mm will run circles around any MF.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,364
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
His keeper rate was extremely low, but he could afford countless rolls of film, neve bother with processing, in a sense, he was the pioneer of digital photography. But I hope this thread did not mean to be about HCB.

As for the thread itself, it's been stated already, there is no way for MF camera to keep pace with 35mm, for lack of ease of bringing it up to take a shot, to being much more conservative in choosing a shot. The latter partly due to fewer frames available, partly because of much more inviting (to careful composition) finder's view, and partly due to processing (but that is more in tune with "keeper rate" mentality and desire to make the most out of every frame.

That "keeper rate" is more and more built into our format's "mind set", the larger it gets the fewer throw-aways we work for.

Having said all that, there is a bunch of subjects 35mm will run circles around any MF.

I can shoot about as fast with a Hasselblad with a prism and I can with a 35mm camera, but why??? With either I take time to compose, focus and set the exposed, however I am not in a race. I want to make every exposure the best that it can be and I appreciate the bigger viewfinder and better optics of MF.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom