Subject preference

[mooseontheloose]

Interesting question. I love landscapes but am not good at producing good images of them. That being said, I don't feel that the galleries are dominated by Ansel Adam wannabees, but I do get that feeling sometimes in the forums. I certainly haven't been here as long as many others, but I find that the image content of the galleries changes with the seasons -- sometimes a lot of amazing landscapes, or portraits, or alternative work, and sometimes just (to me) uninspiring work. But I like this place because you can get some insightful comments from everyone from rank beginners to darkroom gods, and almost everyone here puts a positive, encouraging (constructive) spin to images, which is not something that I often see elsewhere. I really get inspired by people doing things radically different to what I do, and it is one of the reasons why I like APUG so much.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

hi thomas

are you able to "lock" your focus ?
that is why nothing stays in focus in the first situation
and partly the second. you have to anticipate movement sometimes

sometimes there is a knob to turn that locks focus
othertimes, like with a speed graphic, there is a little lever ... once you focus+lock it
the focus shouldn't move at all

since "stuff" is moving it won't be the same anyways ( you , the subject &c )
that is why i use focus references /zones as i mentioned above.

i'd look into figuring out how to lock your focus before you give up completely
but then again, if you would rather use a MF camera or a 35mm, don't bother with the 4x5
its just a light and money trap

john

Hi John,

Locking focus isn't a problem at all. It's more about changing the focus of the camera as the subject matter moves - and when you have a film holder in place you can't see through the camera how it affects the picture.

But I feel like it isn't worth taking it farther. I'm OK using the 5x7 whenever I see something that is a stationary subject, like the patch of cone flowers I have in my front yard. I took pictures of them yesterday with the 5x7. And last time I made portraits with the 5x7, out of ten exposures only two were sharp, because the person in front of the lens had moved ever so slightly, resulting in her cheek bone being sharp, as opposed to her eye. That 80% waste is too much for me, so I have chosen to not use the 5x7 for that type of subject matter anymore.

You're right - it's just a light and money trap. Thanks for bearing with me.

- Thomas

 

[Bill Burk]

I think the format and subject matter are intertwined in a different way.

In my experience here a lot of members are either primarily artistic, or primarily engineers. Obviously a tremendous crossover though.

The whole right side/left side brain thing.

The artistic types are often more people types and use systems that allow them to shoot people easily.

The engineering types like the process, tinkering and working with larger formats and often hate photographing people.

So we get engineering types shooting quietly with a large format camera pointed at subjects that don't talk and move, and we get the artsy fartsy people persons shooting easily moveable cameras at subject that do move and talk.

And both types are here on APUG, which is very cool.

Interesting division, I agree it has a lot to do with it but wonder if the division isn't art/engineer... but social/shy.

I've proved I'm not an engineer. But I consider myself shy. And I am an Ansel Adams loving landscape photographer. He's not taking any more pictures, neither is Henri Cartier-Bresson. They missed a few spots, and I am going back for touch-up.

 

[Bill Burk]

If I'm shooting something where people or items move in the frame, I can't see where they are in the frame, ten seconds later when I'm ready to expose film.

Those are the parts that made sheet film completely useless for me, and nothing but a waste of time. Besides, I get almost comparable quality from 120 compared to 4x5 ...

This is where rangefinders come in handy.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

This is where rangefinders come in handy.

Do they work well when it's dark? I've never used one, so am curious.

 

[Bill Burk]

Do they work well when it's dark? I've never used one, so am curious.

See my Tiki Room shot in the galleries... You only need a point of light to see two points to bring together.

 

[Brian C. Miller]

If I'm shooting something where people or items move in the frame, I can't see where they are in the frame, ten seconds later when I'm ready to expose film.

Those are the parts that made sheet film completely useless for me, and nothing but a waste of time. Besides, I get almost comparable quality from 120 compared to 4x5 that I really don't see the point. Just a bunch of frustration in setting it up, and time lost - and for what? A lot more money spent per picture, and a very small advantage in image quality...

Any of the cameras with a coupled rangefinder will do. While the rangefinder on my Super Graphic is missing the little yellow square piece, the range dial works just fine, and I can guestimate a good focal point along with some depth of field. (Of course I can only get good DOF in the daylight)