Just musing on ULF formats.

sanking · Dec 23, 2005

I have owned both a 7X17 and 12X20 camera for the past ten years. The first ones were Koronas, and now I have two Canhams. I am starting to think I would be better off with just one format? Everytime I plan a trip or shooting vacation I agonize over which one to take. This summer I had both packed and ready the night before I was to leave, then decided one needed to be unloaded in the interest of space.

What does this mean? Well, too many choices are causing some frustration with my way of seeing and I am considering selling one of these cameras. Given the fact that with my knees the 12X20 is no longer a backpacking camera I am inclined to let it go. But I hate to part with it. What do others do when they have more equipment than they can practically use?

Sandy

rogein · Dec 23, 2005

I've been in the same position - suffering from positional vertigo it became difficult to use the 11x14 & 7x17. I love those 2 formats - they go so well together. Thankfully both of them went to 'good homes' (fellow apugers). In the meantime I've had to make compromises and 'limit' myself to 5x7 - going to 'digineg' when I like to see something 'bigger'. Sure wish I had the 'means' to have done it in my 30's whereas now my 'body' is the problem.

jovo · Dec 23, 2005

Keep them both. Work on your decision making skills;-)

Kerik · Dec 23, 2005

Sandy,

I'm in the same boat - too many formats, too many choices - 7x17, 12x20 and 14x17 (in addition to the 'small' stuff like 8x10, etc). I've decided to sell the 7x17 and maybe the 12x20. The last couple of years, most of my film work has been 14x17 and I'm very happy with that format. For collodion, I'll continue to use 11x14 and 6.5x8.5.

david b · Dec 23, 2005

I am thinking of going up to 4x10.

JG Motamedi · Dec 23, 2005

Last year I purged my LF shelves. I sold a dozen lenses, two cameras (4x5 and 8x10), and tons of accessories. While my reasons for doing so were more financial and spacial (ie; storage space) than aesthetic, it was, in retrospect, one of the wisest things I have done in years. I decided to concentrate on 11x14 and sold all of my equipment (save a few irreplaceable lenses and a light weight 4x5/5x7 kit) which didn't fit into that project.

In short, I forced myself to concentrate on one project by removing all distractions.

George Losse · Dec 23, 2005

Sandy,
"too many choices are causing some frustration with my way of seeing"

When it starts to effect the photography, then its time to leave one format at home.

I have the problem when I shoot I take an 8x10 and a 8x20 conversion back for the camera. What I hate is when I see something I want to shoot in 8x20 the camera is usually set up for 8x10. But that just means I waste time changing the back before I start shooting.

Back when the ULF bug first bit me, I tried to shoot with 11x14, 8x10 and 8x20. That lasted for about six months, it was just too much for me. It seemed to make me less productive having to decide which format to shoot. I had to cut back, and the 11x14 hasn't left the studio for over ten years.

Lately I've only been traveling with the 8x20. I find it much easier to shoot when its the only option in the Jeep.

Emile de Leon · Dec 23, 2005

Hi Sandy,
I have the same problem. I started with a 12x20 Korona and now have 7x17 and 12x20 Wisners that I'm really happy with. It took a long time to get them to where I was happy with them designwise, still having in the future to do some modifications like conversion to Deardorff 6" geared rising lensboards, but if I can, I bring the both of them in the Suburu, then make up my mind on the spot which to use. The problem with this is that I feel this is a huge waste of energy because only one ends up being used most of the time.
For me though I would rather keep the 12x20 on a tripod in the house with an 11x14 reducing back and do tabletop stuff, using the 7x17 for outside. This is the plan for now. With the rising costs of 12x20 film I really think for outdoors the 7x17 will be the ticket most of the time. I'm even considering an ultralightweight 8x10 like the Phillips Explorer or the new Arca Misura 8x10 for hiking when I dont want to shoot other smaller formats.
But...I'm really a 1 camera and 1 or 2 lens kind of guy. It simplifies things and really brings back better photographs.
Have you considered just keeping the 12x20 and getting a 7x17 reducing back made? Emile/www.deleon-ulf.com

Dan Fromm · Dec 24, 2005

Not to point out the obvious, but 12x20 crops to 7x17. Sandy, what's your justification for having both? Not wasting film?

Cheers,

Dan

Please don't tell me I"m an idiot, I know that already.

noseoil · Dec 24, 2005

Emile seems to have the best answer to this dilemma. A reducing back would simplify things and keep it more manageable. Since aspect ratios are similar but not identical, this seems like a logical choice in composition and gear. All that is needed is the reducing back and film holders and you would have both formats in the car. Because walking is a consideration, I don't envy you the choice.

How many times a year do you go out shooting with both formats? How many road shoots as opposed to how many hikes? Is there an ultra-light 12 x 20 made which would do both? Since you already have lenses, film holders and film, this might be the way to go. If you decide to stick with the car, just get a 20 x 24 and a couple of reducing backs. Would be glad to take the 7x17 off of your hands, but only in the interest of simplification and helping you to limit your discomfort. tim

jp80874 · Dec 24, 2005

http://www.winnebago.com/
http://www.babyjogger.com/

Keep it all.
Merry Christmas

John Powers

avandesande · Dec 24, 2005

Having too much stuff is a mental drag. Get rid of the equipment you don't use.

scootermm · Dec 24, 2005

Sandy
to go along with your "musing" title, it was strange when I got my 717, took a long time to get comfortable with the format, and I still feel like Im doing that in many regards. I often times day dream about eventually getting a 1220. But I think Id more than likely be in the same dilemma. It would be too much to choose from. I recently got a very inexpensive 5x7 camera and so I dropped off my 8x10 to get the bellows replaced locally. its been there for almost a month now. Not because its taken him that long to replace, but because I just havent gone over to get it. Ive noticed I dont really miss it much. The 5x7 has sort of replaced the 8x10 camera in my subconscious decision to choose two formats to shoot in. It seems Ive settled on that. I imagine if I were to ever get a 12x20 Id likely get rid of one of the other formats. Not sure if I could get rid of the 7x17, mainly because I love it so much and what its "shown" me in the world I photograph. I know theres many people here on APUG that have numerous formats that they regularly shoot in. I cant imagine that... Id be too scared Id never leave the house because I would constantly be debating what format to take and would never be able to choose. But thats likely just different strokes for different folks.
I havent seen any of your work in person (aside from a gorgeous pt toned kallitype at Ed Buffaloes) but the images Ive seen online it seems to me that in regards to the 7x17 and 12x20 formats all the images Ive seen are wonderful. so theres a part of me that says dont get rid of either one
I cant imagine the cumbersome of 12x20 though. Seems so much larger and more logistically tough than a 7x17.
well that was likely a pointless reply... and of no real help...
thank god I put the disclaimer it was a musing as well.

Jorge · Dec 24, 2005

If you are not going to use it, sell it! Why keep something around that is just going to make you feel guilty for not using it. It happened to me with my 4x5, it sat in my safe for 4 years and not once did I take it out. Of course since I dont enlarge anymore this was an easy desicion for me. You still use the 12x20 so it might get harder to get rid of it.

If I was in your place I would look at the work I have done in the past couple of years, what format have you used the most? If there is no clear answer then keep them all, obviously you still use them, if there is then get rid of the formats you dont use and move on...

sanking · Dec 24, 2005

Sounds good. Buy a RV to store the gear and carry it around!

In fact, makes a lot of sense for me since I will be retiring from the university after the end of this academic year and would like to make some long trips on the road to places I have never been able to visit during the spring and fall.

Sandy

jp80874 said:
http://www.winnebago.com/
http://www.babyjogger.com/

Keep it all.
Merry Christmas

John Powers

sanking · Dec 24, 2005

scootermm said:
I cant imagine the cumbersome of 12x20 though. Seems so much larger and more logistically tough than a 7x17.
well that was likely a pointless reply... and of no real help...
thank god I put the disclaimer it was a musing as well.

That is the issue precisely. The 12X20 is must larger and more cumbersome to work with than the 7X17, and that is the reason I rule out the reducing back others have mentioned.

As for Jorge's point about selling gear we don't use, I agree, but that is not the case here. In 2005 I made well over a hundred negatives in 12X20 size, and almost as many in 7X17. So the issue is not that the equipment is not being used, but the decision making process I have to go through to determine what I can practically carry around in any given situation.

But no problem, it is all musing anyway. Maybe I will just get a better carrying case for the 12X20.

Sandy

jp80874 · Dec 24, 2005

Buy a RV to store the gear and carry it

sanking said:
Sounds good. Buy a RV to store the gear and carry it around!

In fact, makes a lot of sense for me since I will be retiring from the university after the end of this academic year and would like to make some long trips on the road to places I have never been able to visit during the spring and fall.

Sandy

Originally Posted by jp80874
http://www.winnebago.com/
http://www.babyjogger.com/

Keep it all.
Merry Christmas

John Powers

Sandy,

It has worked for us in retirement for three years. I carry the 8x10 in the jogger, bad back. No RV but we use a Toyota Highlander with a basket out back to carry extra stuff to a rental cottage in Maine. We were just down to Brevard, NC from OH shooting waterfalls with the Highlander and Phillips 8x10. We travel on the Great Lakes by our own boat, but we have to tie up to a dock to plant the tripod. Why not an RV for you? Well $3.00 a gallon can be a deterrent.

Enjoy,

John

Ole · Dec 25, 2005

My ugly Russian 30x40cm camera fits nicely in the trunk/boot of my SAAB 900. If I can't get to the location by car, I'll walk with a smaller more portable camera!

Mike A · Dec 25, 2005

For me it was a financial and logistical decision to use only one format.
I sold every last piece of 4x5 and medium format equiptment I owned in order to just make the initial purchase of the Phillips 11x14 I now use.

At this point I'm happy with my square format, If I wanted larger negs I think I will be doing so digitally. Although I've pondered it, to go to a 7x17 would be to distracting from a visual standpoint for me. Right now I cant have another size film to purchase, holders to buy.......I'm sure I missed about a half dozen more things. Multi format is really not for me.

Mike

Dave Wooten · Dec 25, 2005

Sandy,

That is a nice set of cameras...bought and paid for....I'd hang on to them a while longer and see where the light falls once you've left the university.

sanking · Dec 25, 2005

Hi Dave,

I believe an RV is the answer. And since my wife is a few years younger and won't be thinking of retiring for another 5-7 years I won't have to worry about sharing space!!

As for my next travels, another trip to Oaxaca, Mexico in a few days, the decision making process is over, and the goodies are packed. I am taking the very light 5X7 Nagaoka, with 125 Nikkor SW, 180 Fuji A, 210 G-Claron (one of my Jim Gali jewels, a Dagor type G-Claron) and a 300mm Nikkor M, with a Lee wide angle compendium hood with adaptors for all of the lenses, and a set of B&W filters. And ten film holders, all fillled with TMAX-400, of which five are in the backpack. And a Gitzo G 2200 tripod with Manfrotto 3047 head, with quick release plate. Oh, and a Fuji GA 645 Zi with many rolls of Kodak Portra 220 color negative film, ASA 160 to 800. That, plus the Harrison changing tent that I just bought, which should prove very useful on this trip since the bedromm of the house where we stay in Oaxaca can not be made completely dark.

Sandy

Dave Wooten said:
Sandy,

That is a nice set of cameras...bought and paid for....I'd hang on to them a while longer and see where the light falls once you've left the university.

Mark Sawyer · Dec 25, 2005

When in doubt, be indecisive...

"I am starting to think I would be better off with just one format? Everytime I plan a trip or shooting vacation I agonize over which one to take.-7 years I won't have to worry about sharing space!!"

Keep them both! Use them both! Deciding which one is the best kind of agony, kinda like deciding between Ginger and Mary Ann back in the 60's. Embrace your agony with a smile!

- Mark

Michael Kadillak · Dec 25, 2005

If you do not have enought equipment, you always wonder what another perspective would be do for your image making. When you have gear to the second power the difficulty is about the fact that you can only use one camera at a time and space to carry it is the concern. And as ws we get older, the logistical issues of mobility and weight become more front and center.

After seeing first hand how little room there is your Pathfinder I feel that you simply need more room to carry gear into the field. Avoiding the pack/unpack episodes at hotels would be another benefit of sleeping mobility in the field. Personally, I would opt for a diesel long box 4x4 truck with an Alaskan pop up bed camper for the ground clearance and the year round comfortability. That latitude in the travel mode is invaluable particularly out West. IMHO conventional RV's are for visiting the grandkids when you would rather park in the driveway rather than travel to and from the hotel.

You already have the lightest camera and lens combination for ULF possible so I feel that the angst you are feeling will dissapate with additional capacity to take gear into the field and eventually one ULF format will win out. I could also see you investigating 5x12 as an alternative at some point.

Have a great trip!

Cheers

janvanhove · Dec 26, 2005

I mostly shoot at home, so in theory I should be able to have as much gear as I want, but I find that when given too many choices, I just pick the tool that is in theor the best for the job. When I only have film in one format, or have the holders loaded just for one, it just forces me out of the "comfort" zone of how I should in theory use which format, and into just enough constraints to do new and interesting stuff...

I know I should in theory keep only the 11x14, just to give me the extra incentive to use it more, but I know I will regret my 4x5 for the polaroids, and the smaller formats for the candids...

I'd say keep both, and decide which to take along before you leave for a shooting trip on a coin toss, this way you don't have to worry about decisions !

PJ

severian · Dec 26, 2005

Price

Sandy
The 12x20 is obviously bogging you down. Get rid of it quickly. How much do you want for it?
Jack

Just musing on ULF formats.

sanking

rogein

jovo

Membership Council

Kerik

david b

JG Motamedi

George Losse

Emile de Leon

Dan Fromm

noseoil

jp80874

avandesande

scootermm

Jorge

sanking

sanking

jp80874

Ole

Moderator

Mike A

Dave Wooten

sanking

Mark Sawyer

Michael Kadillak

janvanhove

severian

Just musing on ULF formats.

Membership Council

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency