What do you do that you need LF?

DanielStone

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2008
Messages
3,114
Location
Los Angeles
Format
Multi Format
I use 8x10 and 4x5(same camera, reducing back for 4x5) because I like to. I also contact print(no room for an 8x10 enlarger), and frankly, an 8x10 print is big enough FOR ME. I've never been into monster prints, but I'll agree readily that there are times that call for a grand, super-size print to display the glory of what is on the negative.

and since most of my work is b/w now, I can develop/print everything myself(as I can with color neg as well), but shooting LF b&w affords me the ability to develop by inspection.

this can be done with roll films, but its much harder, due to the smaller negative.

and the advantage of shooting 8x10 IMO? Shoot an 8x10, and they you can trim the print to whatever size you want out of the scene . cheaper/lighter than lugging around multiple sizes of film holders and reducing backs(or other cameras ).

I'm 21, but I feel this is my best way of working. Slower, more contemplative, and a very decisive approach. 35mm has its place in my work as well, along with 6x7cm, but the 6x7 I've found I like to contact print as well. Enlarging has always been somewhat of a pain for me, with calculations,etc... to do all the time to keep density the same. Seeing on the g/g EXACTLY what you will be printing affords one the ability to almost watch TV in front of you .

and it brings up pretty girls too, asking what you're doing . so of course I let them go under the darkcloth(with me to guide them of course )

-Dan
 

anon12345

Member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
207
Location
Central OK
Format
Multi Format
The other day I wanted to copy an old 19th century photo (3.25x4.25) to something bigger, where I could enjoy it without having to resort to using a loupe. So, already having a nice 16x20 picture frame that would would work very well with the image, I then chose 16x20 as the new image size. Of course there are a number of methods I could use to for this task. But, I chose the 4x5, made two exposures, printed the second exposure, and toned the print within just a few hours time. So, why did "I" choose the 4x5? Good resolution, but primarily because with only needing two exposures using sheet film made sense.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Thomas Bertilsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
I think it depends on the subject matter you're photographing and how you do things.

In the way I photograph, I need to react to what's in front of me quickly. So I simply don't feel like I have time to set up a 4x5 (or larger) camera, unless it's in controlled conditions, like a studio, or a portrait session where the sitter is patient and has lots of time. Perhaps my technique isn't adequate, but I really prefer looking through an SLR and composing on the fly. I love hand holding the camera when I can and need a lot of flexibility.
I also don't believe that absolute sharpness and detail is needed to make a good picture. As much as I'm impressed with someone's printing abilities, I am leap and bounds more impressed with a picture that speaks to me. And that is never really about tonality or grain or micro contrast. It is always about a message that speaks to me, composition, and whether the picture feels important to me or not.
So I use fairly simple equipment. I have a 5x7 camera with an old portrait lens on it in a barely working shutter. It's fun to dig it out sometimes, but it sits for a year or more between uses. I prefer my MF and 35mm SLR cameras and feel I get good enough quality from both systems to make pictures that I am happy with, and I basically don't care one iota what others think of the technical quality of them.

My focus is on using a camera that I know well enough to be able to intuitively approach subject matter. I want to be able to feel like the camera isn't something I need to fiddle with before I can make the picture - it needs to be an extension of my arms and what's in my head. I need to know it so well that it's as if it wasn't even there. Until I reach that point I will struggle with any camera. The difference with sheet film was that in spite of using a 4x5 regularly for a couple of years, I could never get comfortable with it. Too many adjustments and too complicated to set up to feel natural to me.

So I will stick to roll film except for when I dig out the 5x7 to make a few contact prints here or there.
 

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format
I think the initial point I tried to make has been misunderstood. I did not state that LF can be shot as quickly as smaller format cameras. I stated that smaller format cameras need not be shot with any less care and attention to detail than LF cameras, just because they are smaller format cameras. The use of LF can teach us all a lesson or three about how to approach any photo, regardless of format, whenever possible. I would not say that the slow and deliberate way it is most often used is unique to the format, as so many of the posters in the thread seem to believe. The time and attention one spends on a shot come down to personal choices, not the format. While LF usually limits one to shooting in a less rapid manner than one is capable of doing with smaller formats, the same does not apply when you flip the terms; because a smaller format camera can be shot more quickly than LF does not mean that it must be.

I try to take just as much care with composition when using smaller formats as I do when using LF, whenever possible. To me, the biggest difference comes down to tripod or no tripod, rather than LF or smaller format. For me, once a tripod comes out, the difference in the way I shoot various formats is pretty-much eliminated. I hand hold when a tripod would cause me not to get shots that I want to get. In these shots, I try to keep just as much of an eye on composition as I would with a tripod shot, but I am aware that timing (and time spent) are of more importance, so they get preference if it comes down to making a choice between the two.

My point was that the use large format should not force anyone to care any more or less about the amount of work and attention to detail that goes into crafting a photograph, simply by way of the format's technical necessities. There is plenty in LF that prevents one from shooting it in ways that one can shoot smaller formats, but what – aside from oneself – prevents one from shooting smaller formats in the same way that LF is shot? If LF is forcing you to care more about the details of your photos than you do when shooting smaller formats, you should practice using your LF mindset with the smaller formats. Then you will see that the mindset is all that really matters. Any piece of photo equipment can be used as slowly or deliberately as one would like. There are limits on quickness with any camera, but not on slowness. This is why I have never understood the "LF forces me to slow down and pay attention" assertion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,382
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Well said
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,266
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
It's noticeable that those who work with large format or have used it in the past work more efficiently with smaller formats, less wastage of shots, better compositions, faster working. it comes from the discipline of making each shot work.

Ian
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BetterSense

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
3,151
Location
North Caroli
Format
35mm
This is why I have never understood the "LF forces me to slow down and pay attention" assertion.
Click to expand...

Your argument is very logical, and years ago I would have agreed with you completely. However, the older I get the more I realize that people cannot be psychologically and spiritually separated from their tools. Although we may be ABLE to shoot just as deliberately with a less fiddly format, the behavioristic result is that we just don't.

It's the same argument with listening to mp3s versus vinyl. Many people think that vinyl sounds better, mostly because it forces you to listen harder since it's expensive, fiddly, and you can't stop the record once it's going. Many would argue that you can pay attention and enjoy the music the same way with mp3s, just by forcing yourself to pretend that you can't pause it whenever you want, pretend that you can't repeat any track you want, pretend that you paid $30 for this mp3 and it's going to be slightly more worn out after this play, pretend that it's a real slab of vinyl spinning around in front of you. Maybe some are better pretenders than others, but there's no pretending when you are spinning real vinyl, and there's no pretending when you have to use an 11x14 camera to photograph. Your way of working WILL be affected.

Scientists have proven that placebos only work when they are expensive. If you ask people to pretend that they are expensive, the placebo effect is vastly weaker. I think you can ask people to pretend that a small format camera works just like a large format camera, but deep down they know better, and so the "LF makes me slow down" sentiment makes sense in that rationally irrational, human way.
 

Thomas Bertilsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
I liked reading that.

Plus an 11x14 takes THAT much more time to set up. You just can't do it fast enough, depending on the subject matter.
With vinyl, or any other music medium, unless you're recording live music that's happening *now*, or listening to it, the 'subject matter' is available today, tomorrow, a year from now, etc.
Most of the time, that's not true for what's in front of the lens... So listening to music, I can move with less agility, knowing the music will still be there later on. With photography, I have to act quickly. I used a 4x5 for two years and as much as I loved that beautiful hand crafted wooden camera, I just could not get along with it for most shots, and got fed up with not being able to compose on the fly, or change the composition without having to move a whole bunch of things around.

But that's my way of looking at things, and that probably doesn't ring true for everybody else. Main thing is, I am much happier shooting roll film. And when I have sufficient time to set up a shot of a static composition, I automatically do slow down, because I can.

 

BetterSense

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
3,151
Location
North Caroli
Format
35mm
I also prefer more 'reactive' photography. Even when I shoot LF, I tend to hold hand-hold the camera, and I have 2 hand-holdable LF cameras. I guess I have this thing with holding the camera in my hands.
 

pdjr1991

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
180
Location
Salisbury, M
Format
Multi Format
One of the reason i have switched to LF is exactly for the purpose of slowing down. I have a tendency to react to fast and even though i have a "good shot" it could be better. I hope slowing down will help me become a better photographer. On a second note i also like the fact that it is a lot easier to touch up negatives of a 4x5 than a 35mm.
 

keithwms

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
6,220
Location
Charlottesvi
Format
Multi Format
Hmm, a whole lot of "slowing down" responses!

While I can understand that attraction, for me the slowing down is the absolute last thing I need... I am slow as molasses even with a whizbang AF 35mm SLR :rolleyes:

For me LF is all about seeing the subject more clearly, framing more precisely, and using the standard movements and the properties of the lens to go beyond what the eye sees without the camera.

I became interested in larger formats mostly because of the attraction of framing at 1:1 magnification.

I also really enjoy the simplicity of the gear and I will admit to a little bit of ego boost from knowing that there is nothing in the LF photograph that I didn't do by myself, i.e. without any auto anything. I love my little wooden boxes and the fact that they are so very simple.

Not to argue with prior responses, but... slowing down is something you can do with any camera. Anybody who's gone shooting with me has probably said "take the damn picture already" more than once. I tend to spend a lot of time framing and moving around and then wind up not taking the picture at all. Different strokes for different folks...
 

papagene

Membership Council
Council
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
5,437
Location
Tucson, AZ
Format
Multi Format
I just like the whole process of LF photography. I really enjoy using my ancient Kodak 2D 5x7.
OOPS... I think I already posted this!
 

pdjr1991

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
180
Location
Salisbury, M
Format
Multi Format

Its why i do want to slow down. For an 18 yr old whos used to the fast pace world we have now adays its hard for me to take my time. I will now. I know you can argue i can do it without LF but face it, with LF there is now autofocus. You cannot shoot continuously, and theres no autoexposure or camera metering. You have to take time and do all of them to get a nice shot.
 

keithwms

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
6,220
Location
Charlottesvi
Format
Multi Format
Well, again, I don't intend to argue with anyone about what they should do: everyone must do what works best for them. Go with your own thing. Note that I surrounded my comments with multiple disclaimers to his effect

But... rollfilm photographs can be created with just as much patience, thought and care as LF photographs... and many are.
 

Thomas Bertilsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
keithwms said:
Go with your own thing.
Click to expand...

And therein lies the whole bottom line in why photography is so interesting to talk about, and also a lot of the frustrations about photography. Because those that think critically about the process develop their own sound methods that work for them, doesn't mean that it works for others.
All good practical knowledge of photography is best earned by doing. Yet these internet forums seem to thrive and have millions of ideas bouncing around almost uncontrollably.

What an aside I came up with. Sorry for the digression.

Different speeds for different people. I don't have the patience for sheet film, neither do the things I like to photograph, it seems. Some people can work with it and love it. Go figure.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,382
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Like I posted before, I wanted to try it.

You only go around once in life, therefore you should try everything once, twice if you like it. That way you will have no regrets about missing an experience.

Steve
 

mopar_guy

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2009
Messages
1,173
Location
Washington,
Format
Multi Format
Why large format?

1. My Anniversary Speed Graphic looks really cool.

2. Physical fitness.
 

24x30

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
22
Location
Kusterdingen
Format
Multi Format
mopar_guy said:
Why large format?

1. My Anniversary Speed Graphic looks really cool.

2. Physical fitness.
Click to expand...
It looks cool, it's technically, I had GAS, it's more fun to print in the darkroom ...

No. 2 is wrong (in my case) an up to date 'Canikon D10000 abc' (or what ever) weights more than my LF camera.

rudi
 

climbabout

Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
225
Location
Fairfield Co
Format
8x10 Format
For me - it's all about contact printing. I shoot primarily 8x10 and 4x10. I also have a 4x5 and a maimya 7 that I can make nice enlargemnets from, but nothing compares to the 8x10 or 4x10 contact prints for me.
Tim
 

bspeed

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
61
Format
35mm
Nothing, simply nothing!!

Except:
Live a life that is a little different
Live a life sharing the same experiences as others past, present and future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…