Your most orphaned format?

[fotch]

110, for my Pentax SLR and 126 for my 3M/Minolta

 

[flash26c]

I'm going to have to say 35mm - I have a very complete Nikon F kit that gets very little use. Been doing 6X6 and 4X5 lately.

 

[BrowniesAreCool]

My most orphaned format? Digital.

Ditto.
I vary rarely use 127, although I have a few 127 cameras. I always tend to shove a 35mm cartridge in the Kodak Brownie 127, and the Brownie Reflex isn't holding up too well. I replaced the felt in the Ansco Dollar, so I might give that a go soon if I can source some nicely priced film. The Kodak Hawkeye Ace is probably the smallest box camera Kodak ever made, so that one's fun to shoot with. Although it was with a roll of Gratispool film that expired in the early 1970s. I will definitely use the Vest Pocket Kodak once I've dealt with the pinholes as well. But so far, I've only shot two very expired rolls of 127, and I haven't developed either yet. (Haven't bought the chems ) Besides, one of those rolls was Triple Print. Although, I've heard success stories from developing with HC-110 at 10C for 8 minutes...
If I didn't have my 126 cartridge for reloading, that would definitely be my big orphaned format. Fortunately, I do have one, and have been having a great time reloading it with 35mm.

 

[munz6869]

2x3 sheet film, and 16mm film! Both are a weird niche for me - I can't stop collecting 2x3 Rilex Press cameras though - up to four now, and they are such a great little aluminium field camera...

Marc!

 

[Ole]

4.5x6 cm plate, or maybe 9x12 plate.

Ditto for the 4.5x6cm plate, but I do use my 9x12cm cameras. with film, and occasionally plates.

Edit: Somewhere I have a 110 camera. Even less used than 126..

 

[RalphLambrecht]

done wih4x5. too much trouble.done with35mm, too small of a negative.medium format is ideal for me.

 

[darkosaric]

6x6 - square is just not for me. On the end I have sold my rolleiflex - it is not right that such a beauty of a machine sits unused , later I tried again with agfa isolette - sold it, again with adox golf - sold it. Now I have holga that sits there, together with polaroid back.

 

[MaximusM3]

4X5. Like Ralph, too much trouble. Every time I go back to it, I quickly realize that is just not for me. Life is full of wonderful and fleeting moments, and with large format they just go by while I play around looking like a demented Ansel 35mm is good enough for me, and medium format follows closely.

 

[markbarendt]

Oh this is easy to answer, Eric: I have two fancy dSLRs and haven't used them in ages. Not sure when I will, actually. Thousands of dollars wasted, if you ask me

All of my film cameras get attention fairly often. I don't buy anything to have it sit. Except the digitals, apparently...

+1

 

[Aristophanes]

Not for me personally, but my neighbour down the street says...




....APS.

 

[pgomena]

I've abandoned 35mm. My kit is a dinosaur (Canon FD, thanks, Canon) and it's getting tough to focus some of the lenses as my eyes age. I much prefer MF and LF for anything serious, and now use an electronic gadget that claims to be a camera for the little things I'm not serious about. I will peddle my 35mm gear once my kids are done with high school electives, or give it to them. It's worth pennies on the dollar for what I paid for it all.

Peter Gomena

 

[PKM-25]

I had a 4x5 camera for a couple years, it was just far too slow for my style of shooting and frankly much of the work I see from the format nowadays looks like it was too slow for the photographer that used it as well....

6x6 is my bread and butter and exactly how I like to frame the world, and it is very fast in terms of my reaction time. 35mm gets the nod due to always having a small camera with me such as an FM3A or an M3. 35mm also shares its use with my XPan, a simply brilliant format and look for films like HIE, Techpan and Tri-x.

If I shot large format again, it would be ULF, at least 11" x 14" and contact prints only..

 

[36cm2]

... with large format they just go by while I play around looking like a demented Ansel .

This is too funny. I love 4x5, but do prefer medium format when i anticipate that i'll put on the "demented Ansel" show.

 

[MattKing]

I take turns orphaning various formats .

But only temporarily each time.

 

[mooseontheloose]

4x5. I have a wonderful Crown Graphic, with all possible holders, and I've only used it once. And with several boxes of Acros Quikloads expiring in my freezer as we speak.

Next in line would be pinhole cameras - I have a few, want to get more, but rarely shoot with them. In both cases they require more advanced planning and forethought than I'm used to for my regular style of shooting.

 

[himself]

So do I. I wish I had saved up a bit more and bough an SQ instead of an ETRS.

that's funny you should say that, I have an SQ that I hardly ever use these days...

and +1 one more for the chaps that have said goodbye to the dSLR

 

[Steve Smith]

I take turns orphaning various formats

And some of us run orphanages for them.


Steve.

 

[Usagi]

35mm


I haven't found much use for it lately, expect shooting some slides and project them.. Anything serious goes with MF or 4x5 / 8x10 and I am happy with snapshots taken using pocket size d*****l (which is actually a little sad)

 

[MaximusM3]

Interesting answers. I'm scratching my head at some of these though. It seems that some people do "serious" work with MF or LF but ditched 35mm. Does that imply that 35mm is a "joke" format just play around with? Where is all this "serious" work in larger formats? Last time I checked, MANY great photographers have used 35mm very successfully. Not trying to start yet another format war here (please let's not), but I'm just curious of why the distinction between "serious" (MF and LF) and non (35mm). As far as I am concerned, ANY format can be used for serious (whatever that means anyway) work, as long as what's between the ears is working, from half frame to ULF.

 

[ambaker]

4X5 for me. Sadly, I have to confess that I have a Speed Graphic, with plenty of holders, sitting in its case for years that I have never used to take an image. I don't have the facilities to develop or print 4X5 film, so it sits loved but unused. I would like to find a 120 back for it, at less than stratospheric prices, to get some use out of the camera.

I had my eye on an 8x10, but while I try to convince myself I could contact print with it, I fear it would become but another pampered house guest.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?jzbz4c

 

[Ralph Javins]

Good morning;

(1.) First; interesting comments. I am surprised at the number of people who consider 135 or 35mm film to be an "orphan."

(2.) My own orphan is a Minolta Instant-PRO that takes the old Polaroid Spectra instant film. I have not taken a photograph with it. However, it is possible that the Impossible Project People will perform a miracle and come up with something to work reliably with it. It could happen. If I want a spare, one of the local shops has another Minolta Instant-PRO on on a shelf for sale for $100.

(3.) The talk here about reloading 126 cartridges has me looking also at some of my older non-used simple cameras again. I have been reloading Minolta 16mm film cartridges for a while now. It is used now when I want to do something fun. I had a Minolta 16 II in my right front pocket for many years. I might do that again.

 

[markbarendt]

I'm just curious of why the distinction between "serious" (MF and LF) and non (35mm). As far as I am concerned, ANY format can be used for serious work, as long as what's between the ears is working, from half frame to ULF.

It's purely personal as far as I'm concerned. These isn't a general standard we all have to adhere to.

There are though significant differences in the physical look we can get from various formats.

Personally I came to a point where smoothness of tone transitions and detail became more important, HP5 and TX in 35-mm started being too gritty for me, and not just in my own work. For me the grittiness was competing for my attention with detail I wanted wanted to see.

So I adjusted, I became willing to give up faster films and carry a speed light and a monopod or tripod and use bigger cameras...

This weekend I've been printing some shots from a trip I took to Monument Valley a few years back. The difference in look and feel between the 400 speed 35-mm and the TXP in 4x5 I shot on that trip is stark on an 11x14 print.

It's not that one is better than the other for everybody, it's just that I have a preference about what I want and have decided that the extra effort of slower films and larger formats are well worth the sacrifices for important stuff.

 

[MaximusM3]

It's purely personal as far as I'm concerned. These isn't a general standard we all have to adhere to.

There are though significant differences in the physical look we can get from various formats.

Personally I came to a point where smoothness of tone transitions and detail became more important, HP5 and TX in 35-mm started being too gritty for me, and not just in my own work. For me the grittiness was competing for my attention with detail I wanted wanted to see.

So I adjusted, I became willing to give up faster films and carry a speed light and a monopod or tripod and use bigger cameras...

This weekend I've been printing some shots from a trip I took to Monument Valley a few years back. The difference in look and feel between the 400 speed 35-mm and the TXP in 4x5 I shot on that trip is stark on an 11x14 print.

It's not that one is better than the other for everybody, it's just that I have a preference about what I want and have decided that the extra effort of slower films and larger formats are well worth the sacrifices for important stuff.

Hi Mark,

No issue with this whatsoever. All of us make choices based on a number of parameters. My issue is more with the word and meaning of "serious". Meaningful work can be done with any format and regardless of format. You've made your choices based on what you want for your work (grain, detail, size, etc) but I'm sure your 35mm work wasn't any less "serious" because of grain, detail, size, just different.

Max

 

[BrowniesAreCool]

Good morning;

(1.) First; interesting comments. I am surprised at the number of people who consider 135 or 35mm film to be an "orphan."

(3.) The talk here about reloading 126 cartridges has me looking also at some of my older non-used simple cameras again.

I am too. I love 35mm, as it can be used in just about anything. Sure you get a small negative, but it's great for enlargements if you get some of the nicer stuff. Plus, it's cheap, so I'm not worried about anything going too wrong with it, especially when I adapt a camera. (alright, the Brownie 127 is unmodified, but still)
35mm cameras have some of the most aesthetically pleasing and unusual designs around. Just look at most manual SLRs before electronics took over. And my Ricoh Mirai looks like a video camera. (Although it is extradonarily ergonomically designed)
I see no reason why 35mm and Medium Format can't just coexist. I can't comment on Large Format, as I don't own any LF cameras.

Reloading 126 cartridges is wonderfully simple; the only fiddly bit being getting the cartridge open in the first place. That shouldn't be a problem if you get a newer one; the plastic won't be brittle. It only gets really fiddly when you decide to be awkward and shoot the original film in the cartridge, like I did.

 

[markbarendt]

Hi Mark,

No issue with this whatsoever. All of us make choices based on a number of parameters. My issue is more with the word and meaning of "serious". Meaningful work can be done with any format and regardless of format. You've made your choices based on what you want for your work (grain, detail, size, etc) but I'm sure your 35mm work wasn't any less "serious" because of grain, detail, size, just different.

Max

I simply think that it needs to be understood that the word serious as used here relates only to a certain person's choices. It's not global in meaning.

I still carry and use 35mm and I have made it into a personally more acceptable tool by using slower film, lights, tripods, etcetera and it has serious uses but, it is for me used mostly as a snap shot or testing format, and or for documentation (i.e. a maybe I want to come back here with a bigger camera format, a lets see if this lighting works format, a what does FP4 do here format).

For example at a wedding I might shoot a bunch of 35mm stuff of the "lower salable value" shots, virtually all the candid's at a wedding fall into this category. They are essentially high value snapshots (that can be very well done) but they would rarely be considered for anything larger than an 8x10 and where proofs on 5x5 paper (or Internet ready scans) are more often than not, the end of the line. That is serious work but really more about getting the bride's buddies to hire me for their weddings or their baby portraits and for grandma to hire me for her 50th anniversary celebration than it is about creating art.

For the more important stuff, shots where the bride or maybe her mom may actually be serious about wanting to pay for large prints, I'll "get serious too" and grab for a bigger camera.