Instruction Books for Large Format

[Pioneer]

I have both the Simmons book and the Stroebel book. Of the two, I'd recommend the latter.

I recently received the revised edition of the Simmons book and was disappointed. There's very little change from the original, and despite it having a copyright date of 2015 the chapter on film still talks about Kodachrome, Panatomic-X, and other films that haven't been available for a long time.

I haven't compared my original copy with the revised edition page-by-page, but it looks like the changes (if any) are very minimal. If you already have the 1987 edition, there's no reason to get the revised edition.

Thanks for that info SodaAnt. For now I am working through Ansel Adams' books. I do have the other two books and will get to them when I am able but I don't think I'll be buying any updated editions for now.

 

[SodaAnt]

Thanks for that info SodaAnt. For now I am working through Ansel Adams' books. I do have the other two books and will get to them when I am able but I don't think I'll be buying any updated editions for now.

The three Adams books are excellent. Insights from a real master.

 

[Roger Cole]

Thanks. I had that thought as well. There are certainly advantages to starting with 4x5 other than just the cost of film. The size and availability of equipment is one. But that argument can also be used to justify using medium format film. Hasselblads and Rolleiflexes can be used to take amazing pictures.

Sure they can, but without the benefit of camera movements. That's one of, if not THE (these days with modern films) big reasons to use a view camera in the first place.

For saving money on film, you can try using x-ray film. There's a huge thread on the LFPF about it. It's still available and MUCH cheaper than regular camera film, even Foma from Fotoimpex, but has its own issues including the fact it scratches so easily.

The better way to save money on film while learning to use a view camera, to me, is to get a 4x5 camera and a roll film back. You can shoot 120 film but with the controls and movements (and inverted GG view etc.) of the view camera. You can also use lenses that might to cover 4x5 fully, if so inclined. There are, or were, view cameras made specifically to use 120 film, or smaller sizes of sheet film that used to be more commonly available, but I'd just go ahead and get a 4x5 and roll film back because it's much more versatile.

But if one is sure they want to shoot 8x10 anyway... I think I'd still go ahead and start with 4x5 given the cost of 8x10 film these days because you WILL make mistakes and waste film. There's nothing like a view camera, which makes you do everything yourself, for showing you new and frustrating ways to screw up. And if you buy used you could probably re-sell it without much if any loss when you decide to move up to 8x10.

 

[Pioneer]

Sure they can, but without the benefit of camera movements. That's one of, if not THE (these days with modern films) big reasons to use a view camera in the first place.

For saving money on film, you can try using x-ray film. There's a huge thread on the LFPF about it. It's still available and MUCH cheaper than regular camera film, even Foma from Fotoimpex, but has its own issues including the fact it scratches so easily.

The better way to save money on film while learning to use a view camera, to me, is to get a 4x5 camera and a roll film back. You can shoot 120 film but with the controls and movements (and inverted GG view etc.) of the view camera. You can also use lenses that might to cover 4x5 fully, if so inclined. There are, or were, view cameras made specifically to use 120 film, or smaller sizes of sheet film that used to be more commonly available, but I'd just go ahead and get a 4x5 and roll film back because it's much more versatile.

But if one is sure they want to shoot 8x10 anyway... I think I'd still go ahead and start with 4x5 given the cost of 8x10 film these days because you WILL make mistakes and waste film. There's nothing like a view camera, which makes you do everything yourself, for showing you new and frustrating ways to screw up. And if you buy used you could probably re-sell it without much if any loss when you decide to move up to 8x10.

Thanks Roger. Good to hear from you. You always seem to have a good grasp on what is important.

I think I am obviously too worried about the size of the film. I have to keep in mind that the most important thing here is to learn to use the camera the right way and to get some decent prints under my belt, not brag about the size of the film. After looking through what I have available, I have to agree with those of you who have been trying to convince me to use 4x5 film.

 

[MTGseattle]

Don't ditch the Cambo. An 8x10 in the hand is worth________.

There's some decent youtube videos that are large format specific put out by Mat Marrash. "LFF," or Large format Friday. He explains things clearly and generally has a camera out and displays what he is describing.

 

[4season]

A number of years ago, I had the pleasure of attending an exhibition of Edward Weston's 5x7 and 8x10 contact prints, and they were exquisite. I started thinking dangerous thoughts about how 5x7 and 8x10 might actually be cheaper for me than 4x5 if I did not stray from contact-printing!

But then, I also remembered this quote attributed to Weston:

Anything more than 500 yards from the car just isn't photogenic.

Even in my 30s, hauling a 4x5 outfit into the field seemed like no small matter. Within 500 yards? I wish.

Hardware-wise, my limited LF experience in the field (tall trees, buildings) suggested to me that I didn't need the broadest range of camera movements, and sometimes they actually complicated setup. Front rise/fall, front/rear tilt (which can also serve as additional rise/fall) got a lot of use. Horizontal swings and shifts, not so much (though it can be fun to "magically" remove one's reflections from mirrors and plate glass windows with a bit of shift!) OTOH, if I were shooting more portraits, I might need little or no camera movements at all.

 

[Pioneer]

A number of years ago, I had the pleasure of attending an exhibition of Edward Weston's 5x7 and 8x10 contact prints, and they were exquisite. I started thinking dangerous thoughts about how 5x7 and 8x10 might actually be cheaper for me than 4x5 if I did not stray from contact-printing!

But then, I also remembered this quote attributed to Weston:

Even in my 30s, hauling a 4x5 outfit into the field seemed like no small matter. Within 500 yards? I wish.

Hardware-wise, my limited LF experience in the field (tall trees, buildings) suggested to me that I didn't need the broadest range of camera movements, and sometimes they actually complicated setup. Front rise/fall, front/rear tilt (which can also serve as additional rise/fall) got a lot of use. Horizontal swings and shifts, not so much (though it can be fun to "magically" remove one's reflections from mirrors and plate glass windows with a bit of shift!) OTOH, if I were shooting more portraits, I might need little or no camera movements at all.

I am no youngster any longer but if I can get that camera and support gear in and on a backpack I can get it a lot further than 500 yards off the road, even up the side of a pretty steep slope. The good Lord willing I'll be able to do that for awhile yet.

You are certainly right 4season, a well done contact print on the right paper is truly a beautiful thing. And Weston's prints are truly stunning. His prints are one of the reasons why I have always wanted to shoot 8x10. But right now I want to learn and I have enough 4x5 film to get my learning well on the way. I figure that by the time I start to run low on 4x5 film I will already have been able to purchase enough 8x10 for me to transfer things smoothly to the larger format.

 

[GLS]

I also recommend Stroebel's View Camera Technique book. It's a little dry perhaps, but there is no better single reference work.

I started on 4x5, and thus far have stuck with it. At times I get curious about 8x10, but the cost of colour sheets in that size are now prohibitive.

 

[Strembicki]

I taught photography and LF for 42 years and IMHO the best. easiest to read and most useful book for beginners is: A User’s Guide to the View Camera, Stone, Jim. Longman, 1997. ISBN 0-673-52006-4

the Stobel book that has been mentioned is very knowledgeable but, its dense and again IMHO and experience with University students, hard to digest.

 

[Pioneer]

Dense. That word describes me to a "T".

If I read the text and religiously do the exercises at the end of each chapter I have a chance of coming away with some understanding. Not all of it mind you, but enough to get started.

Right now I am working my way through Ansel but I'll look for the Users Guide by Mr. Stone.

Thanks

 

[xya]

I have an older version of Mr. Stone's. It's wonderful im my opinion.

 

[btaylor]

That Cambo in particular can get pretty confusing when I'm trying to focus and that is what I seem to struggle with the most. Based on what I've read I should be able to tell exactly what is, and what is not, in focus on the ground glass. I should not have to guess or estimate. I know that the Crown Graphic is not built to do this, but that Cambo is supposedly built to do exactly that! But I could even see with my contact prints that I wasn't getting what I thought I was. Maybe that SK Angulon 90 isn't up to it but that certainly is not what I've been told.

I was so dissatisfied with some of that 4x5 work that I tossed most of the negatives and went back to my medium format Pentax.

That is strange you had focus problems. A couple of thoughts: did you use a loupe when focusing on the ground-glass? I find it essential. (I don’t know what sort of back you have on the Crown, but most have a groundglass to use for focus as well as the rangefinder.)
You may have a problem with that Angulon, when the lens is serviced I highly doubt there was collimation done- that wouldn’t be part of an ordinary CLA service. Some test shots of a focus target could prove helpful in determining your focus problems.
You could also have a film holder/ focus screen depth problem. The film plane must agree with the groundglass plane. It is possible that they do not. Sometimes the groundglass depth is not the same as the film, leading to out of focus negatives. Also, the Depth of Focus (lens to film plane) is less the wider the lens. So while a 210mm might be within acceptable DoF, a shorter lens may not be.

And a note on film costs, since it takes longer to set up the 8x10, and I am so aware of the costs of each sheet, I take fewer shots than with smaller formats. If I take one 8x10, I could easily have taken four 4x5’s so film cost is kind of a wash. Someone else posted this concept years ago and I have largely found it to be true for me across formats.

 

[Pioneer]

That is strange you had focus problems. A couple of thoughts: did you use a loupe when focusing on the ground-glass? I find it essential. (I don’t know what sort of back you have on the Crown, but most have a groundglass to use for focus as well as the rangefinder.)
You may have a problem with that Angulon, when the lens is serviced I highly doubt there was collimation done- that wouldn’t be part of an ordinary CLA service. Some test shots of a focus target could prove helpful in determining your focus problems.
You could also have a film holder/ focus screen depth problem. The film plane must agree with the groundglass plane. It is possible that they do not. Sometimes the groundglass depth is not the same as the film, leading to out of focus negatives. Also, the Depth of Focus (lens to film plane) is less the wider the lens. So while a 210mm might be within acceptable DoF, a shorter lens may not be.

And a note on film costs, since it takes longer to set up the 8x10, and I am so aware of the costs of each sheet, I take fewer shots than with smaller formats. If I take one 8x10, I could easily have taken four 4x5’s so film cost is kind of a wash. Someone else posted this concept years ago and I have largely found it to be true for me across formats.

Thanks BTaylor. I'm not really certain why that Crown Graphic had problems but it did. I didn't really spend any time trying to troubleshoot the issue at the time and I have since sent that camera along to the great camera graveyard. I have picked up a nice Cambo monorail which will likely work fine.

Believe it or not the camera that I did not have any focus problems with was my Kickstarter 4x5 Intrepid. The negatives I got from that camera ended up being the only negatives that I kept from that period. They aren't great but they are in focus. But to be fair I really didn't spend a lot of time trying to learn any camera movements with the Intrepid. I just racked it in and out and took what I got. I still have that camera and will probably work with it again once I am ready to start.

I think the reality is that the last time I just wasn't personally ready to spend the necessary time and effort to fully understand large format. I have said this once before and I'll repeat it; spending money is easy, really learning is never that easy. At the time large format was a neat idea and I jumped right in. When it didn't work right the first time I was too easily disappointed and more than happy to move back to familiar territory. Since then I have spent more time thinking about why I really want to do this, so I believe I am more prepared to spend the time learning how to do things properly. For some people things seem to come to them more naturally than with others. I am just one of those people who needs a bit more learning time, and perhaps a bit more commitment, to get things to work the way they should.

As for the 8x10 vs 4x5 issue. I'll be honest here. The entire reason that I had decided to try large format in the first place was because of the stunning beauty of certain 8x10 contact prints I have seen displayed in museums that I have visited. The last time I had tried large format I wanted to start out by using 8x10, but I was convinced to start with 4x5 instead in order to "learn the ropes", so to speak. People meant well and they really wanted me to succeed, but that approach really didn't work out too well for me the last time. Right or wrong I had kind of hoped to forget and skip over that past failure on my part and move more directly to what I wanted in the first place. I am very well aware that 8x10 is harder because of the size of the equipment, and quite a bit more costly. But I thought I was ready to deal with those issues then, and actually still feel that I am now. But, for the time being, I have decided to "keep my powder dry" and spend some more time up front reading, studying and learning about the entire process from choosing the camera all the way to making the print. There are people with a whole lot more experience than I advising me to start with 4x5, and I feel it would be foolish for me to ignore it.

I have to say that I am actually glad I started a little more slowly this time and started by asking questions. I didn't do that last time. The knowledge of people here and on the Large Format Photography forum has been a real eye opener for me and I am really appreciating everyone's willingness to help and to find out why it didn't seem to work for me the last time. At first I was actually a bit concerned but now I am looking forward to working with large format. There is so much to learn that it is a bit overwhelming but I believe it will work out better this time. I know a lot of you believe this to be pretty easy but I know now that getting to those beautiful contact prints I am imagining will take some work.

 

[Besk]

Two things I should add:

The 90mm Angulon that you have is not the best lens to learn movements and focusing with. It is a short focal length in 4x5 and the depth of field is pretty deep - similar to a 28mm lens on a 35mm lens camera. It would be harder to learn the effects of movements with that lens than a longer focal length lens.

Also, whether you have the F6.8 or F8 version it is going to be a little dark on the ground glass screen. Also, the f6.8 Angulon has a small image circle and allows almost no movements.

I would obtain a modern longer focal length lens such as 210/5.6 lens from Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon or Fuji.

Second, my hands are large enough that I can handle a 5x7 negative with one hand when needed. To me that is a big advantage over 8X10 in the darkroom and when loading holders.

Maybe that may be a consideration for you if you want something larger than 4x5. That said, I too believe that 4x5 is the best format to learn from -and your Cambo is a nice camera to learn with.

BTW, I have "The View Camera, Operating and Techniques" by Harvey Shaman. Excellent book to explain the view camera and photos to show the effects of movements.

 

[Jim Jones]

There are two distinct advantages of most view cameras over the conveniently small cameras that many of us use: image quality and the movements of view camera front and rear standards. There have been many improvements in small format image quality, both in optics and film, over the past several decades. To replicate some of the movements of view cameras in small cameras, we can try tilt and shift lenses. My ancient DeJur Versatile Professional 4x5 enlarger has a tilting lens board that enables correcting of converging verticals. This effect can be duplicated in many enlargers by shimming the lens board. I've also occasionally used digital manipulation. Some image quality is lost in the several steps involved, so it would never completely replace photography with view cameras. It certainly was adequate for some applications.

 

[Pioneer]

Thanks Besk.

Yesterday I mounted an older SK Symmar 150/5.6 convertible on the Cambo. That one is certainly ready to go to work. Since one of my immediate goals is to learn to use camera movements and master focusing the camera I kind of figured that the monorail would be a good start. I also have an APO-Symmar 150 L around here which I believe has excellent coverage for 4x5, maybe even enough for 5x7, but it isn't mounted on a lens board. I guess it could mount on the same board that has the Symmar convertible but the lens aperture is no larger than the older Symmar.

 

[Pioneer]

There are two distinct advantages of most view cameras over the conveniently small cameras that many of us use: image quality and the movements of view camera front and rear standards. There have been many improvements in small format image quality, both in optics and film, over the past several decades. To replicate some of the movements of view cameras in small cameras, we can try tilt and shift lenses. My ancient DeJur Versatile Professional 4x5 enlarger has a tilting lens board that enables correcting of converging verticals. This effect can be duplicated in many enlargers by shimming the lens board. I've also occasionally used digital manipulation. Some image quality is lost in the several steps involved, so it would never completely replace photography with view cameras. It certainly was adequate for some applications.

I think I have to agree with you. I have always kept a few rolls of Velvia 50 film around for that very reason in case I am in the mood to work with color. Lately I have also been using Adox CMS 20 II film with my Pentax 645 and I find the quality and detail in those negatives to be absolutely amazing. But I believe that both of those films can also be found in 4x5.

 

[GLS]

But I believe that both of those films can also be found in 4x5.

Velvia 50 has been discontinued now in 4x5 sheets, so you will struggle to find it new at less than extortionate prices.

 

[Pioneer]

Velvia 50 has been discontinued now in 4x5 sheets, so you will struggle to find it new at less than extortionate prices.

I guess that means I'll have to keep my last box under lock and key.

 

[Jim Jones]

I taught photography and LF for 42 years and IMHO the best. easiest to read and most useful book for beginners is: A User’s Guide to the View Camera, Stone, Jim. Longman, 1997. ISBN 0-673-52006-4

the Stobel book that has been mentioned is very knowledgeable but, its dense and again IMHO and experience with University students, hard to digest.

I also recommend the Stroebel book. For the dedicated photographer who might spend thousands on equipment, I strongly recommend Way Beyond Monochrome by Lambrecht and Woodhouse. Search Amazon and elsewhere online for less than the $170 list price. The Paperback edition lists at $90. It is worth that high cost for those who have an intense commitment to the best in B&W photography. You want to spend less? The annotated bibliography is the best I've seen in a book on the techniques of photography. The many photos are well printed and inspiring.

 

[Mick Fagan]

I second Jim Jones suggestion of one of the Leslie Stroebel books, I have the seventh edition of View Camera Technique. ISBN 0-240-803445-0 Printed in the USA, Hardcover.

There are two Way Beyond Monochrome books.

The first one I have is a softcover ISBN 0-86343-354-5 Printed in Belgium.

The second one I have is the second edition, hardcover and is certainly the better of the two. Mainly because there is more (and expanded) information than in the first edition. ISBN 978-0-240-81625-8 Printed in China.

I also have the three Ansell Adams books, read them last century in another lifetime. I think the Way Beyond Monochrome book surpasses Ansell Adams three books in many aspects. not the least of which, is the updated technology. 304 pages for the first edition, 542 pages for the second edition.

My go to books for any information with regard to LF photography is the Stroebel book View Camera Technique and the second edition of Way Beyond Monochrome for many aspects of LF photography as well as exposing and developing film then printing the negative.

 

[SodaAnt]

The second one I have is the second edition, hardcover and is certainly the better of the two. Mainly because there is more (and expanded) information than in the first edition. ISBN 978-0-240-81625-8 Printed in China.

The second edition is also available in paperback and eTextbook versions for $83 and $68 respectively on Amazon.

I have the eTextbook version and it displays very nicely in the Kindle app on an iPad.

 

[DannL-USA]

Dan,

Here's a handy book that Kodak provided. Please forgive if this has already been mentioned.

Photography with Large Format Cameras (by Kodak)

 

[abruzzi]

Dan,

Here's a handy book that Kodak provided. Please forgive if this has already been mentioned.

Photography with Large Format Cameras (by Kodak)

I've never seen that one before. Skimming, it looks pretty good, and practical. Thanks for posting it.

 

[Pioneer]

Dan,

Here's a handy book that Kodak provided. Please forgive if this has already been mentioned.

Photography with Large Format Cameras (by Kodak)

Thank you very much, this is great.