Large format photography

[Curt]

Take the test, I'm going with my RB with a long lens for a while although I'm eye ing my 8x10 again.

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Sexual_repression

...that's less than one second...

 

[MattKing]

I've been shooting a lot with my Pentax 110 recently, does the inverse hold true? Though it's been shooting blanks, which is a whole other euphenism ....

Regards, Art.

Art:

Don't you mean euphemism?

(anally retentive, and pedantic) Matt

 

[PeteZ8]

Since there is little to be gained in terms of image quality over smaller formats, and much is lost in the way of portability and spontaneity, it seems to me that the possession of a large camera, such as a 10x8 can only represent a form of repressed sexual inadequacy. Would anyone care to comment?

I couldn't tell you, I only shoot 110 film on my old Vivitar

 

[walter23]

Since there is little to be gained in terms of image quality over smaller formats, and much is lost in the way of portability and spontaneity, it seems to me that the possession of a large camera, such as a 10x8 can only represent a form of repressed sexual inadequacy. Would anyone care to comment?

I'm not sure if you include 4x5 in this or not, but let me run down the reasons for shooting large format that go beyond inadequate genitalia.

1. Unusual focal plane or narrow DOF effects. Larger formats mean portraits become closer to 'macro' range photographs, with concomittant reduction in DOF. This can make for interesting effects, especially with poorly corrected or unusual lenses. A head shot on 8x10 is a macro, and wide open can give incredibly soft effects. Also these poorly corrected lenses which give beautiful "bokeh" will look sharper in their in-focus areas (than lenses with similar qualities in smaller formats) simply because of the reduced magnification of larger negatives to final print.

2. Perspective control view camera tilts swings yadda yadda

3. Contemplative photography: instead of staring through your automagic 35mm framefinder and happily snapping away (even more of a problem with digital) you spend a lot of time visualizing and thinking through what you want to accomplish. This is a different type of photography - it doesn't suit everything. You wouldn't shoot humming birds with large format. You might very well go after an atmospheric shot of an interesting interior with large format, or walk around the lake for an hour looking for just the right spot for your single sunset shot.

4. Antique lenses & cameras. This is just a fetish thing, because other than a few interesting old optics like some of the old petzvals there's no real advantage to it... but it's fun to put a 100 year old piece of equipment back into service. Just today I was shooting a 9x12 (cm - smaller than 4x5") Voigtlander Avus. It's fun to use these amazingly constructed old cameras, and gives you an appreciation for the design innovations both engineered into those cameras, and the subsequent innovations that led to more convenient modern cameras, like automatic shutter cocking with film advance, frame counters, roll film, SLR mirrors, body-integrated focal plane shutters, etc.

5. Big contact prints & big alt process prints. You can do it digitally or with enlarged negatives, but it's not quite as nice.


I mainly shoot 4x5 and smaller formats.

I have an 8x10 but have yet to put it into commission. I have to finish building the bellows, and that's on hold indefinitely as life has tossed a few curve balls as me over the last few weeks. Nice to know it's sitting around waiting for me though.

 

[Andy K]

You are a bad man Dave, a bad man!

 

[2F/2F]

"Since there is little to be gained in terms of image quality over smaller formats, and much is lost in the way of portability and spontaneity, it seems to me that the possession of a large camera, such as a 10x8 can only represent a form of repressed sexual inadequacy. Would anyone care to comment?"

There is much more than little to be gained. One look at any pic should tell you that, if you are not blind.

I would also like to hear the course of logic you used to determine that possession of a certain sort of camera has something to do with one's sex esteem.

If yours was anything other than an intentionally full-of-shit statement for fun, then you must be blind!

 

[Nick Zentena]

Since there is little to be gained in terms of image quality over smaller formats, and much is lost in the way of portability and spontaneity, it seems to me that the possession of a large camera, such as a 10x8 can only represent a form of repressed sexual inadequacy. Would anyone care to comment?

Isn't this Mother natures way of telling you to hit the gym? Have we gotten to the point that hauling an 8x10 is really a hardship? People used to walk uphill to school both ways.

OTOH my 8x10 is lighter then my 6x7

 

[Les McLean]

I wonder what the difference in the American description of 8 x 10 to the UK use of 10 x 8 has on this in relation to the "repressed sexual inadequacy" that Dave refers too. Is it significant that across the pond the smaller size comes first?

 

[Akki14]

I just thought it was logical putting the smaller number first because you say/type/write... 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. So pick your numbers out of your lineup and it's 8x10. Not sure what the UK logic is in saying 10x8 ... Do you read from right to left now too?

 

[gr82bart]

Don't you mean euphemism?

Told ya I was shooting blanks. Not to mention I HATE typing into my iPhone.

Regards, Art. (Yet I love my iPhone ...)

 

[Ian Leake]

It's an oldie, but this seems appropriate here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0rKBVDb7f8

 

[Andy K]

I've always said 8x10... but when it comes to lumber I say 4x2.

 

[Steve Smith]

I say 8x10 and 5x4.

Steve.

 

[hawkwind]

Developing individual sheets of film allows zone system adjustments. Also, as mentioned earlier, it's rather difficult to fit a 13" Cooke Series II Portrait lens on your average Nikon. I shoot mostly 4x5, but I'm working on getting my Calumet C-1 ready for 8x10. And, yes, one can't always throw up the tripod and get the shot in a couple seconds, but that's where the zen takes over.

--Gary

 

[Monophoto]

Since there is little to be gained in terms of image quality over smaller formats, and much is lost in the way of portability and spontaneity, it seems to me that the possession of a large camera, such as a 10x8 can only represent a form of repressed sexual inadequacy. Would anyone care to comment?

In other words, using 8x10 (or 10x8) is a form of penis envy?

 

[Jim Chinn]

I think it simply comes down to deciding the size you want to print and if you need movements. If you don't require movements and are only going to enlarge up to 11x14 or 16x20 MF with top quality glass will give equal results with the benefit of more dof for a given focal length and faster lenses. IIRC Barry Thornton demonstrates that for the above sizes a camera such as a Rollie SL66 is far superior to LF. Contact printing with an 11x14 camera does not gaurantee an image sharper then an enlargement from say 6x7 MF if poor technique is used or an inferior lens. If you want to go larger with your 6x7 negative you can go the digitally enlarged neg option and use that neg for contact printing or alt processes.

But it is not quite so simple. LF (especially 8x10 and larger) bring a certain aesthetic or quality to the image specifically due to the ability to use movements, the lenses available and the relationship between a portrait sitter and the big camera. And if 8x10 is the perfect size print for you what is simpler than contact printing an 8x10 print. Plenty of inexpensive high quality used cameras and tack sharp lenses available. Using the Lf camera is itself a craft and requires a specific skill set to get optimal results. Just like most of us prefer practicing the craft of the wet darkroom a opposed to digital some prefer the craft of LF to smaller formats. Simple as that.

You also have to consider the enlarging side of the equation. You can have the best MF or 35mm kit money can buy but an inferior enlarging lens, out of alignment enlarger or poor technique will never produce an 8x10 print that comes close to a contact made with an average 8x10 kit.

 

[poutnik]

I just started using a large format camera after many years of 35 mm and MF. I adore the long process of setting up my big camera for a shot. Like extra-long foreplay instead of a quickie! Both can be satisfying in the end. Its not about the superiority of one or another... its the entire act of creating.

But, Valerie, you've actually nailed it perfectly. For me it's about the process. I enjoy creating my 5x7" photos much more than I have enjoyed capturing them on 6x7cm.

And in the 2 years I'm using LF, I think I have learned (and gained) much more than in the 6 years of small/medium format shooting. And I'm still enjoying this learning process.

 

[David Brown]

I wonder what the difference in the American description of 8 x 10 to the UK use of 10 x 8 has on this in relation to the "repressed sexual inadequacy" that Dave refers too. Is it significant that across the pond the smaller size comes first?

No. You gentlemen also drive on the wrong side!

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I'm so large format they call me Tripod

Murray

 

[Steve Smith]

No. You gentlemen also drive on the wrong side!

We have other ideas on that theory!


Steve.

 

[Andy K]

Interesting aside, driving on the right originated in post revolution France. Previously the gentry travelled on the left of the road and the peasantry on the right. Once the revolution came along, to avoid a severely close shave from madame la guillotine, everyone travelled on the right.

 

[Shmoo]

As most of us women know, it's not the size of the equipment...it's how you use it!

 

[Anupam Basu]

Since there is little to be gained in terms of image quality ...

Um, that's where you lost me. What's "smaller format"? 35mm? half-frame? 6x7? If you're shooting 8x10 and not noticing any gain in terms of image quality, work on your technique instead of pondering other people's sexual inadequacy.

 

[Ian Grant]

I've come to realise that Dave Miller has a lot in common with Barry Thornton who he admires - well maybe not a lot in common just a little - his scorn for LF. Reading Thornton's Edge of Darkness, I can see the same envy for those who have mastery of larger formats. Thornton was an SL66 user and makes sure you know that.

Almost same vein of dismissive comments: "Since there is little to be gained in terms of image quality over smaller formats, and much is lost in the way of portability and spontaneity, it seems to me that the possession of a large camera, such as a 10x8 can only represent a form of repressed sexual inadequacy. Would anyone care to comment?"

Well it's generally accepted that LF cameras are 5"x4" and larger so what should we really be saying, or asking.

Ian

 

[RobC]

Well it's generally accepted that LF cameras are 5"x4" and larger so what should we really be saying, or asking.
Ian

Se my first post in this thread. 8x10 has its place as do all formats. But I seriously question the need for 8x10 for the work that most people do. But I also think you have to remember that most people on this forum are enthusiasts and not professional jobbing photographers. As such, anything goes. Who is to say that someone else should not be using 8x10 if they are into old cameras and lenses and enjoy using them. Trying to pass that off as "a form of repressed sexual inadequacy" is immature in the extreme.

Incidentally I met Barry Thorton on a couple of occasions at workshops he gave. He was a pedant and prone to ranting at his students. I pulled out of a series of his workshops because of his attitude. I know of others who didn't see eye to eye with him or his methods. However, he was very willing to share his knowledge with others if they obeyed his dictatums. In the greater scheme of things there are many ways to achieve the same thing and understanding where others are coming from is a life skill which some never master.