Looking at LF, some questions...

pdeeh · Sep 19, 2015

"Knowing basic materials and techniques" can indeed be very helpful.
However knowing and utilising the Zone System as a "primary goal" does not coincide with "knowing basic materials and techniques" and nor is it necessary to understand or use the Zone System as a means to create negatives which meet one's own needs and wants.

the fact that the Zone System may be the means by which you have achieved your goals in this area - and, by the way, good for you in having done so - does not mean it is either the only way or the optimal way for all photographers.

Doc W · Sep 20, 2015

pdeeh said:
"Knowing basic materials and techniques" can indeed be very helpful.
However knowing and utilising the Zone System as a "primary goal" does not coincide with "knowing basic materials and techniques" and nor is it necessary to understand or use the Zone System as a means to create negatives which meet one's own needs and wants.

the fact that the Zone System may be the means by which you have achieved your goals in this area - and, by the way, good for you in having done so - does not mean it is either the only way or the optimal way for all photographers.

Adams' approach is all about learning basic materials and how they respond. It is about as practical as it gets and is not much more than systematic exploration of exposing for shadows and developing for highlights. Those who get their shorts in a knot about it usually think that everyone else treats it like some form of mystical transcendence. It did not drop out the sky one day carved in marble. It is just a methodology. If the OP wants to start there, good for him. He will learn a lot.

removed account4 · Sep 20, 2015

Doc W said:
Adams' approach is all about learning basic materials and how they respond. It is about as practical as it gets and is not much more than systematic exploration of exposing for shadows and developing for highlights. Those who get their shorts in a knot about it usually think that everyone else treats it like some form of mystical transcendence. It did not drop out the sky one day carved in marble. It is just a methodology. If the OP wants to start there, good for him. He will learn a lot.

hi doc w

i agree with you and pdeeh know your materials so you can get them to do what you want
but unfortunately there are always extremists who claim if you don't do the zs exactly a certain way
well you are nothing more than a hack and wannabe ... and a waster of resources ...
its good to have a goal, but that is about it

pdeeh · Sep 20, 2015

Doc W said:
Adams' approach is all about learning basic materials and how they respond. It is about as practical as it gets and is not much more than systematic exploration of exposing for shadows and developing for highlights. Those who get their shorts in a knot about it usually think that everyone else treats it like some form of mystical transcendence. It did not drop out the sky one day carved in marble. It is just a methodology. If the OP wants to start there, good for him. He will learn a lot.

You address me as though I'm somebody who has never studied Adams or any of his books or methodologies.

If this is the case, let me assure you that you are under quite the misapprehension.

Doc W · Sep 20, 2015

pdeeh, I address you as someone who seems to be annoyed that one of the OP's primary goals is to explore the zone system (note that I do not capitalize the term). I am saying, let the guy explore what he wants. He will learn something in the process.

pdeeh · Sep 20, 2015

How have you come to the conclusion that I am annoyed, or trying to dissuade him from exploring the zone system (capitalised or not)?
That's quite a projection on your part, as I haven't indicated my emotional state at all.

What I have expressed is that I find it most odd that someone would choose to state as their primary goal "learning the zone system" (I paraphrase) without at the same time saying that it was in pursuit of making images. However, as someone else pointed out (someone who doesn't seem to think they have some sort of privileged access to my feelings, by the way), it is perfectly legitimate to pursue a technical goal for purely technical motives.

Even if that is the case, it remains a bit of a curious statement to me.

What does annoy me, of course, is people jumping to unwarranted conclusions about my motivations for posting without at least first asking what they are.

Doc W · Sep 20, 2015

pdeeh, I am not interested in pursuing this so here is my final statement on the matter. I will give you the last word.

I found your initial comment to the OP to be not only unhelpful but somewhat condescending. If that was not your intent, then I apologize unequivocally.

Over and out.

analoguey · Sep 20, 2015

jnanian said:
hi analoguey:

whlle looking through the ground glass is fun,
if necessary setting the fstop to f8 or 5.6 or ?
and marking the focus scale for 10 or 6 of 15 or infinity focus
and zone focusing with the view finder or sports finder works great for street-stuff
i used to have a lumedyne flash on the side of my camera set the aperture to f11 @125thS or 60hS and roam around looking through the
finder and doing street stuff .. worked great !
THEN ... i started using a graflex slr, also 4x5, and made for street work, made for portraits, and landscapes
with the only drawback that it doesn't have a flash sync .. the series D i got back in .. 96? had a flash sync on the side
that the seller removed before he sold it to me, so i know it is possible to retrofit an old style x-sync if strobes or other
flash are needed ... the graflex has ground glass, there is no lag time between viewing and exposure seeing the film is already
ready and in the back of the camera ... perfectly weighted and a dream to use ...

personally, i don't like MF i dont' really see the point (unless its a box camera ) ... so for me, its either small or large format, and if i absolutely need to use 120 film
i will stick it in a roll back and put it on the back of a LF camera, so i have the benefits of large bellows for close up / long lens work,
or esoteric etheral looks from vintage or junque, or home made glass ... ( unless its a box camera cause they are .. kind of fun and random to use )
while i see some people like to take their time with LF and slow down, it really isn't too slow for me either, i shoot LF sometimes like a 35mm camera ..

For the most part, I agree - zone focusing, for eg., is something that I have found to be really helpful even with manual 35mm too (and quick - sometimes quicker than an auto-focus camera). Or going for a set fstop and shutter, then managing it within a stop or two through the day. But if, after having used a 35mm system, I had to shoot 4x5 (press camera) for street and have to switch the big holders every time I make an exposure - while figuring out whether I got the darkslide out/back in the right way- not to mention carry about 10 every time: I would probably just drop it altogether. No (fresh) quickloads available now, afaik? Having them around might have made 4x5 streetshooting easier - but where are they available or the holders even.
Personally, looking at the big GG is one of the perks, imho - I had not looked into one until my own LF turned up, so it always is fun to look at/through - kind of like having an easel/framing guide to look at, before one drops in the holders and then releases the shutter

I am not saying there's anything wrong with the OP going for LF, but that they seem to be going for it with expectations that are at cross-purposes with each other (Zone system vs street/quick shot grabs), and probably ending up either disliking LF or not shooting...

Sirius Glass · Sep 20, 2015

analoguey said:
But if, after having used a 35mm system, I had to shoot 4x5 (press camera) for street and have to switch the big holders every time I make an exposure - while figuring out whether I got the darkslide out/back in the right way- not to mention carry about 10 every time: I would probably just drop it altogether. No (fresh) quickloads available now, afaik? Having them around might have made 4x5 streetshooting easier - but where are they available or the holders even.

Have you ever thought about using a Grafmatic 45?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIY5X6-l0tw

handle2001 · Sep 21, 2015

Hi Folks!

Thank you everyone who posted here and messaged me privately to offer suggestions and advice. On further reflection (and due to the fact that I found a very good deal) I picked up a Yashica TLR on ebay and I'm going to play around with it for a while. I am still very interested in LF in the future. I think some of the things I stated in my original post may have been a bit confusing and some of my intent may have been misconstrued, but that's okay. My "primary goal" as it were *is* to make beautiful photographs, and I believe understanding and being in control of the entire process from visualization all the way through printing is the way to do that, and getting to the point where I have that kind of control means experimenting and learning as much as possible. Using sheet film and experimenting with the zone system is one (of many) ways to do that. In the meantime, however, I figure I have little to lose by seeing what MF has to offer me in advantages over 35mm.

P.S. when I said "street photography" what I had in mind was something like this picture I took on 35mm but having more control over the final product from the very beginning rather than making all my adjustments at the printing stage:

I realize now my terminology may have been misleading. I do like taking candid street shots of people but I can't see anything beating a small 35mm for that kind of work.

shutterfinger · Sep 21, 2015

Do you have a copy of The Negative? http://www.amazon.com/Negative-Ansel-Adams-Photography-Book/dp/0821221868
It took me a while to refine my equipment once I decided to get serious with photography. I saved up and bought a Nikon F4s new in 1991. I spent 6 to 8 months reading reviews in photo journals of the day. The Contax RTS III was a close runner up to the Nikon. I too picked up a Yashica TLR, nice camera but did not allow me the flexibility I wanted. Next was a Graphic View II. While playing with it an acquaintance sold me a non functioning RB67. I found the shutter on the 127mm lens dead and non repairable. RB's and their lens were 2 to 3 times more than what they are now. I got it working properly with another 127mm lens and patched light leaks in the 120 film holder. After a dozen or so rolls of film I decided it wasn't what I wanted either. I sold it on ebay then found a Speed Graphic at a local camera store for a reasonable price. It was not my perfect choice but a lot closer than the medium formats. I sold it and bought a Super Speed Graphic. I traded the Graphic View II for a Sinar F1. I started buying old cameras and wound up with 14 4x5's and an 8x10. I fell on finical hard times and sold all but the F4 and the Super Speed. I now have a D300, Cambo Legend 4x5, 2x3 RB Series B Graflex, and a few others to eventually fix, use, sell, trade.

Take your time and find the camera(s) that suit your needs. After reading The Negative, running the tests and finding the correct EI and development time for the films and developers I use I get very good negatives that are easy to print or scan. If I miss then I can easily figure out what I need to do to get it right the next time.

Enjoy!

Paul Howell · Sep 21, 2015

handle2001 said:
Hi Folks!

Thank you everyone who posted here and messaged me privately to offer suggestions and advice. On further reflection (and due to the fact that I found a very good deal) I picked up a Yashica TLR on ebay and I'm going to play around with it for a while. I am still very interested in LF in the future. I think some of the things I stated in my original post may have been a bit confusing and some of my intent may have been misconstrued, but that's okay. My "primary goal" as it were *is* to make beautiful photographs, and I believe understanding and being in control of the entire process from visualization all the way through printing is the way to do that, and getting to the point where I have that kind of control means experimenting and learning as much as possible. Using sheet film and experimenting with the zone system is one (of many) ways to do that. In the meantime, however, I figure I have little to lose by seeing what MF has to offer me in advantages over 35mm.

P.S. when I said "street photography" what I had in mind was something like this picture I took on 35mm but having more control over the final product from the very beginning rather than making all my adjustments at the printing stage:

I realize now my terminology may have been misleading. I do like taking candid street shots of people but I can't see anything beating a small 35mm for that kind of work.

You will find the Yashica a very good tool for the work you want to do, having said that as you are shooting cityscapes a view camera will provide additional control. My first LF camera was a Speed, I still have it sans the rangefinder which broke in the 70s, I also have a Crown, I shoot it either hand held or on monopod. But for a cityscape I would use my view camera. If you decide to move to LF a TLR is good to have in your quiver, my opinion is LF does not replace 35mm or MF, just an added dimensions. In terms of Zone, AA used the zone system with both 35mm and 6X6, a good starting point if have not already read is

The Zone System for 35MM Photographers: A Basic Guide to Exposure Control by Carson Graves.

Alan Gales · Sep 21, 2015

PDH said:
If you decide to move to LF a TLR is good to have in your quiver, my opinion is LF does not replace 35mm or MF, just an added dimensions.

+1

Each format has it's place and does very well at what it was designed to do.

Sirius Glass · Sep 21, 2015

PDH said:
If you decide to move to LF a TLR is good to have in your quiver, my opinion is LF does not replace 35mm or MF, just an added dimensions.

Alan Gales said:
+1

Each format has it's place and does very well at what it was designed to do.

+1

cliveh · Sep 21, 2015

handle2001 said:
For a while now I've wanted to move beyond 35mm to a bigger format, and I was convinced medium format was the next step. Now, however, I'm rethinking that mainly because I've been reading quite a bit about fine art photography (my desired genre) and it seems most serious photographers are using large format cameras.

I consider myself as a serious photographer but use mainly 35mm. Are you dising us 35mm photographers?

analoguey · Sep 23, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
Have you ever thought about using a Grafmatic 45?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIY5X6-l0tw

I didn't even know that existed! Thanks for the info - I only thought it was either pack film or three 4x5s. That looks like a really useful tool to have!

Now I'll have to look for them!

Sent from Tap-a-talk

Sirius Glass · Sep 23, 2015

We can all learn something new every day. Even the greybeards.

Alan Gales · Sep 24, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
We can all learn something new every day. Even the greybeards.

Yeah, but to teach the Greybeards anything you have to climb those 7000 steps to High Hrothgar just to speak with them. Oh, and don't let them shout at you!

Sirius Glass · Sep 24, 2015

Alan Gales said:
Yeah, but to teach the Greybeards anything you have to climb those 7000 steps to High Hrothgar just to speak with them. Oh, and don't let them shout at you!

I am guessing that you need the exercise anyway.

Alan Gales · Sep 24, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
I am guessing that you need the exercise anyway.

Yeah, you are right but unfortunately climbing all those stairs only gives my fingers exercise. High Hrothgar is located in Skyrim after all.

removed account4 · Sep 25, 2015

cliveh said:
I consider myself as a serious photographer but use mainly 35mm. Are you dising us 35mm photographers?

clive

you should know by now people who aspire to be real photographers always leave their little cameras behind
because its been said here 1000 times real photographers use large cameras, and the larger the camera, the more serious
and competant the photographer. it might be "dissing" 35mm photographers but unfortunately it is the mindset and reality of a lot of people.
and if you don't expose and shoot a certain way, certain subjects, you are wasting precious resources ...

UMMV

analoguey · Sep 25, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
We can all learn something new every day. Even the greybeards.

:-D.

cliveh said:
I consider myself as a serious photographer but use mainly 35mm. Are you dising us 35mm photographers?

I think what's being said is that all 35mm shooting is useless for serious photographers. After all, even Bresson ditched his Leica for paint brushes. And you know what comes close to that? LF!
[emoji1]

sent from tapatalk

handle2001 · Sep 25, 2015

Good lord, I shoot sheaves of 35mm and there's nothing wrong with it. Chill out, people.

analoguey · Sep 25, 2015

Well, I certainly wasn't being serious in my last response. Thought it was obvious :-D

sent from tapatalk

Alan Gales · Sep 25, 2015

handle2001 said:
Good lord, I shoot sheaves of 35mm and there's nothing wrong with it. Chill out, people.

Shooting 35mm is for sissys! Here is a man's camera!

http://lafinlarry.net/faas/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=18&start=100

Of course I'm joking too. I own two 35mm Stereo Realist cameras.

Looking at LF, some questions...

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency