PDA

View Full Version : ULF Why do it?



Gary Tarbert
2-Apr-2015, 06:59
I am looking at the reduced lens options once you go to 8x10 , And i wonder what challenges face ULF shooters and why bother? 11x14 would be challenging but 16x20 4x bigger than 8 x10 !!what lenses would cover this image area?And yes i know Awesome contact prints no need for an enlarger yada yada ,But hey modern films films are pretty good i think they can stand a four times enlargement . And the weight OMG a 8x10 on a four mile trek is hard enough. Just curious as to why anyone would pursue ULF

dwross
2-Apr-2015, 07:15
Pure fun. The "Yes! I am still a kid!!" kind (although, there is no shame in as-far-as-the-car-can-go photography:).) And you really can't dismiss the Awesome contact prints.)

Will Whitaker
2-Apr-2015, 07:21
Ground glass seduction. Besides, it's fun. Like self-flagellation.

You make a good point about enlargement. Some would ask the same about LF in general. But I don't have to prove or defend my sanity to anyone these days. Besides, I love my 12x20. But I don't go on four-mile treks, either. Two or three is enough.

Oren Grad
2-Apr-2015, 07:22
For the contact prints.

Because although carrying the equipment is a pain, using it is a blast.

For the contact prints.

For the contact prints.

For the contact prints.

Did I say "for the contact prints"?

It's up to you as to whether the difference between contact prints and enlargements is something to get excited about. If not, there's little point to ULF.

Sure, you can define scenarios where, if everything goes right, an enlargement from ULF will be technically superior in some perceptible way compared to a bigger enlargement from a smaller format. And for that you pay a fearsome price in logistical challenges.

But for most users, it's about the contact prints.

PS: I can't carry a ULF camera on a 4-mile trek. If it's not somewhere I can get to with a car or with a cart, then I can't photograph it with ULF. C'est la vie. I have smaller cameras for treks.

jnanian
2-Apr-2015, 07:31
cause you got the camera + lens cheep, use paper negatives and it is fun ?

Jim Fitzgerald
2-Apr-2015, 07:58
For the carbon prints from in camera negatives up to 14 x 17! Seeing is believing.

John Kasaian
2-Apr-2015, 08:28
All this.

Kimberly Anderson
2-Apr-2015, 08:39
I'd be redundant at this point to say anything else.

goamules
2-Apr-2015, 08:40
Why do people bungee jump, where there are parachutes?

Michael Cienfuegos
2-Apr-2015, 08:55
I'm not yet into ULF, but having an 8x10 makes me want something bigger. I guess it is true, "Bigger is Better"


Why do people bungee jump, where there are parachutes?

Don't bungee jump in Mexico, they will think you are a pinata.

m

Vaughn
2-Apr-2015, 08:55
If I want a bigger print, I want a bigger negative (contact printing alt processes with in-camera negatives).

Jim Noel
2-Apr-2015, 09:11
I am looking at the reduced lens options once you go to 8x10 , And i wonder what challenges face ULF shooters and why bother? 11x14 would be challenging but 16x20 4x bigger than 8 x10 !!what lenses would cover this image area?And yes i know Awesome contact prints no need for an enlarger yada yada ,But hey modern films films are pretty good i think they can stand a four times enlargement . And the weight OMG a 8x10 on a four mile trek is hard enough. Just curious as to why anyone would pursue ULF

Make a few images with an ULF and you will see why we use them.

Monty McCutchen
2-Apr-2015, 09:35
For my portraiture it changes the experience for the sitter. Although hard to articulate for each sitter what that difference is, there is no doubt sitting in front of a 20 x 24 changes them. There is a radiance in their comportment that the best I can describe is participatory. Something isn't taken from them, they are a part of it, and it is loved. Having shot many many sitters with all of my formats 8 x 10, 10 x 12, and the aforementioned 20 x 24 that radiance changes exponentially as the bigger formats come out. It is fun to witness and be a part of as the photographer.

As for other photographic disciplines I can't believe no one has mentioned contact prints yet!!!


Monty

Kodachrome25
2-Apr-2015, 09:48
what lenses would cover this image area?

This one ought to do the trick on 16x20 with some movements to boot:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?117554-FS-30-quot-f12-5-Goerz-Red-Dot-Artar-coated-and-mounted-in-an-ILEX-5-shutter

I am still exploring the idea of 16x20 after seeing Hugo Zhang of Chamonix use his in Death Valley with a number of good lens choices like a Nikkor 450, 24' Red Dot and Nikkor Apo 760. But it would be for contact prints as the main consideration, not the ground glass, not the "Wow, look at that camera" factor.

But...every time I make a nice 16x20 from a dynamic 4x5 image that I had only a few moments to make, the idea of going ULF gets pushed back a bit.

The impact of the image, not what format it was printed from, is my sole concern and main reason why I find medium format to be by far my most powerful image making tool.

Randy Moe
2-Apr-2015, 10:05
Because we can and soon won't be, unless we start learning from Denise Ross.

Film is Dead. Long Live Film!

Magic

goamules
2-Apr-2015, 10:10
Because with wetplate collodion, your different sized plates are made in camera. You want a big 10x12 or 16x20 Ambrotype? Get a big camera.

Randy Moe
2-Apr-2015, 10:35
Because with wetplate collodion, your different sized plates are made in camera. You want a big 10x12 or 16x20 Ambrotype? Get a big camera.

Does anybody do WPC indoors? I'm fearful to attempt it inside, chemicals. Then there's the amount of light needed.

dwross
2-Apr-2015, 10:59
Because we can and soon won't be, unless we start learning from Denise Ross.

Film is Dead. Long Live Film!

Magic

:)!

I have high hopes and expectation that there will be some form or another of film for a while yet. Even LF and ULF from Ilford, bless 'em.
But, I do know that the old colorblind and ortho emulsions, dense and creamy, are long gone accept for DIY, and that's what I want to photograph with.

Thankfully, people are coming around and starting to recognize that wet plate, as lovely as it is, isn't the only game. More people learning and preserving a legacy is a very good thing.

Vaughn
2-Apr-2015, 11:05
...As for other photographic disciplines I can't believe no one has mentioned contact prints yet!!! Monty

I think Oren mentioned them a few times...:)

jp
2-Apr-2015, 11:12
There are old lenses that cover ULF just fine and produce a beautiful image on the film. I bought an old tessar that covers 14x17 for $100. Pinhole and meniscus are options too.

In theory, I could shoot a portrait or woods scene with my DSLR, make a digital negative and make a big alt process or silver contact print. It's not cheating, it's just a different style.

I look at old photos and appreciate the style and craft and don't want to simulate them, I want to make them.

It's not a replacement for 4x5 or 8x10; I consider 4x5 the most useful versatile format of the bunch. I shoot a lot of medium format using one camera and one lens, and the limitations prove productive. ULF limitations are real too, and it makes you think about making the best you can within those limitations.

John Jarosz
2-Apr-2015, 12:11
Friends think I'm nuts with the 8x20 (actually the 8x10 as well). Well, there's always someone crazier than me, 8x20 is considered small ULF.

I can do 4x10 and enlarge to 8x20. Hard to believe, but the 4x10 enlarged looks different than the 8x20.

Contact printing.

Oren Grad
2-Apr-2015, 12:31
Did I mention how cool contact prints are, whether silver or alt-process?

Also, it's fun. :)

There are plenty of lenses, classic and modern, that will cover 11x14/7x17. Even some really small ones. The pack starts to thin out beyond that, but there's still plenty enough for formats up to 20x24 and even beyond to be workable.

N Dhananjay
2-Apr-2015, 13:06
It's rare for me to be able to add something of value to a thread. Ready?

It's for the contact prints....

When I was using 4x5, I made 1:1 enlargements and a contact print to understand the difference, keeping as much as possible constant. The first thing is that I could not get the two prints to match completely. There is something about eliminating the second optical path that makes a noticeable difference. Its not sharpness per se (an enlargement from a really good lens would be sharper than a contact print from a less sharp lens) but some combination of sharpness, tonality (especially in the highlights - the Callier effect maybe) and other factors. I decided I liked the contact prints more - I could make decent enlargements and there was nothing wrong with them but there was something about the contact print. The best way I have found to express this is that there is a very pleasing overall contrast to local contrast look and feel.

Since I committed to contact printing, I had to deal with the issues around using large cameras. I use primarily 8x20 and 8x20 which give me one format which is very square and another than is very elongated. Right now, that allows me to explore the visual concerns that I am interested in...

Cheers, DJ

jbenedict
2-Apr-2015, 14:13
Why does anybody do anything? There are perfectly good pictures in books.

Eat, sleep, urinate, defecate, fornicate.

There is more to life than that.

jnanian
2-Apr-2015, 14:18
Does anybody do WPC indoors? I'm fearful to attempt it inside, chemicals. Then there's the amount of light needed.

yes, illumiquest ( on apug ) does it indoors, outdoors &c, he even does stop motion WPC ...

evan clarke
2-Apr-2015, 17:15
Really? Given The challenges of life, why get out of bed in the morning?

David Lobato
2-Apr-2015, 17:34
It makes you think, as in "it costs me $25 (or more) to point that thing and take one photo!" There's something to be said for having a camera that's a challenge to fit into a compact car. But then later, your first negative will be the darn most awesome thing you ever saw.

Yes, ULF is insanity, then doing it again, and again, and expecting another wonderful result.

Len Middleton
2-Apr-2015, 18:00
The big ground glass provides more room for additional participants...

131745

Steve Sherman
2-Apr-2015, 18:30
With all due respect, it's all been said, simply put, a large, well made contact print is intoxicating !!

Will Whitaker
2-Apr-2015, 18:39
Because I still can.

Michael Kadillak
2-Apr-2015, 19:12
With all due respect, it's all been said, simply put, a large, well made contact print is intoxicating !!

I will drink to that.

I ascribe to the motto of the firearms manufacturer Heckler Koch - In a World of Compromise - Some Don't

Loading up the truck this evening with the 11x14, the 8x20 and the 8x10 point and shoot. I will be doing this as long as I possibly can.

N Dhananjay
2-Apr-2015, 21:03
Why does anybody do anything? There are perfectly good pictures in books.

Eat, sleep, urinate, defecate, fornicate.

There is more to life than that.


I believe medical students use the mnemonic of the 4 F's to remember those prerogatives - fighting, fleeing, feeding and mating....

David A. Goldfarb
2-Apr-2015, 22:08
And by the way--contact prints.

welly
3-Apr-2015, 03:06
I'm not yet into ULF, but having an 8x10 makes me want something bigger. I guess it is true, "Bigger is Better"



Don't bungee jump in Mexico, they will think you are a pinata.

m

I know exactly what you mean. I love my 8x10 and I shoot with that more than anything at the moment but I always have this nagging in the back of my head telling me "imagine 11x14" contact prints!"

I've drawn the line in the sand at 8x10 though and I won't step over it. Honest.

welly
3-Apr-2015, 03:09
ps. I'm amazed no one has mentioned contact prints.

Jim Fitzgerald
3-Apr-2015, 07:21
8 x 10, 11 x 14, 8 x 20 and 14 x 17 carbon transfer contact prints. BTW they each have their own backpacks and the all fit in my Toyota Corolla thank you very much!!;)

Oren Grad
3-Apr-2015, 08:19
Because, because, because, because, because
Because of the wonderful things it does

Michael Cienfuegos
3-Apr-2015, 08:20
8 x 10, 11 x 14, 8 x 20 and 14 x 17 carbon transfer contact prints. BTW they each have their own backpacks and the all fit in my Toyota Corolla thank you very much!!;)

At the same time???

m

Jim Fitzgerald
3-Apr-2015, 08:29
At the same time???

m

They all go out at the same time on long trips!

Liquid Artist
3-Apr-2015, 08:47
The only reason why I don't have a ULF is because it was hard enough hiding my 5x7 from my future wife. How would I ever hide a 11x14?

However I may still get an 11x14 soon, if I want to end my life on this planet as I know it.

Besides, if I'm crazy enough to be with my woman. I'm crazy enough to walk further than 4 miles with a bigger camera.

Drew Bedo
3-Apr-2015, 08:55
Just curious as to why anyone would pursue ULF

With respect, I say: If you have to ask . . .no one here can possibly explain it to you in a way that you will understand. It is a little bit like the "why" of sailing or backpacking. To come back to large format photography . . .why use film today? Why do folks use wet-plate technology or any other home-brewed technique like Platinum/Paladium, Albumin pr even Daguerreotype?

Jim Fitzgerald
3-Apr-2015, 08:56
I'm so lucky because my woman has even carried my 8 x 10 backpack while I carried my 8 x 20 backpack. Now we use the double wide stroller when we can. Life is good! Oh, did I mention contact prints!!

Scott Davis
3-Apr-2015, 09:47
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=54870&d=1303780979

Because you can't do THIS with a toy-format camera :)

Michael Cienfuegos
3-Apr-2015, 10:04
I'm so lucky because my woman has even carried my 8 x 10 backpack while I carried my 8 x 20 backpack. Now we use the double wide stroller when we can. Life is good! Oh, did I mention contact prints!!

Who pushes the two of you in the stroller? My wife wasn't able to carry her own purse, much less a camera. I have a little cart to haul my stuff, no woman. :(

m

StoneNYC
3-Apr-2015, 10:20
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=54870&d=1303780979

Because you can't do THIS with a toy-format camera :)

Unless it's digital... LOL

N Dhananjay
3-Apr-2015, 11:40
[QUOTE=Liquid Artist;1232354]The only reason why I don't have a ULF is because it was hard enough hiding my 5x7 from my future wife. How would I ever hide a 11x14?

QUOTE]

I believe you actually hide behind the 11x14 which is large enough to count as a fortification....

StoneNYC
3-Apr-2015, 11:55
[QUOTE=Liquid Artist;1232354]The only reason why I don't have a ULF is because it was hard enough hiding my 5x7 from my future wife. How would I ever hide a 11x14?

QUOTE]

I believe you actually hide behind the 11x14 which is large enough to count as a fortification....

If you get a 20x24 you can live in it, which is handy when you get kicked out after buying a 20x24... :whistling:

Randy Moe
3-Apr-2015, 12:08
Unless it's digital... LOL

I use 40" HDTV as GG.

It's mounted on Arkay Studio Stand.

Mammoth DSLR.

TXFZ1
3-Apr-2015, 13:06
I use 40" HDTV as GG.

It's mounted on Arkay Studio Stand.

Mammoth DSLR.

Do you flip left to right and view it standing on your head?

David

Drew Bedo
3-Apr-2015, 13:07
So Randy; I guess that your wife won't let you use the big TV?

Randy Moe
3-Apr-2015, 13:42
Both wives have passed.

Jody_S
3-Apr-2015, 15:28
I'm about to try 11x14 within a day or so, I really hope I don't get the bug. I still haven't recovered (financially) from the 8x10 disease.

Will Whitaker
3-Apr-2015, 16:03
Run!! Run, Run now while you can!
Once you taste the nectar, there's no going back!

StoneNYC
3-Apr-2015, 16:24
I'm about to try 11x14 within a day or so, I really hope I don't get the bug. I still haven't recovered (financially) from the 8x10 disease.

Yea I did 11x14 and decided 14x17 would be even better LOL

sanking
3-Apr-2015, 16:24
The best thing about using a ULF camera and contact printing is that you don't have to worry about diffraction limited resolution, since in most cases your lens won't stop down to f/256.

Course, diffraction still may be an issue if you scan!!

Sandy

Jim Fitzgerald
3-Apr-2015, 16:36
Run!! Run, Run now while you can!
Once you taste the nectar, there's no going back!

Thant reminds me. I need to start working on the 20 x 24 back for my 14 x 17 camera!!

Randy Moe
3-Apr-2015, 16:39
Because I can.

I just unpacked a Korona 7x17 Panoramic View camera. Bought here, on our invaluable 'For Sale' Sub Forum. I have already thanked the seller by personal email for a pleasant exchange and a real beauty of a camera. I, for once, am speechless. No 750 pixel image does this gem justice.

Now to match a lens to her and find a way to protect her when she leaves the enclave.

The GG is original and a vast sight to ponder. I get GG tunnel vision on 8x10, I will need to stroll from section to section of this GG.

A note for other yearners. This is a Panoramic View camera, not a Banquet View Camera, do your homework, before marriage.

Prints de contacto! Pardonome'...

Kodachrome25
3-Apr-2015, 17:05
With respect, I say: If you have to ask

Of course people have to ask, I asked.

We live in a world where the impact of a photograph is more important than ever in order to make a genuine statement of rising above it all. It stands to reason that in terms of ULF most would want to be utterly dumbfounded by the anticipated evidence of sheer mastery of such a logistical undertaking, depicting readily how those photographs stand up against truly great works. Yes, it is a contact print..no doubt...

But is it an incredible photograph?

Will Whitaker
3-Apr-2015, 18:34
Of course, I realized the OP would provoke a lot of responses, but really I had no idea of the support for ULF. Maybe we should consider a ULF sub-forum... :rolleyes: ...Like APUG has. *ahem!*


This would make a great opening thread...

Randy Moe
3-Apr-2015, 18:53
I had asked this question a few times of 7x17 users and now I can answer it.

This single matching 7x17 Korona film holder DOES hold 7X17 X-Ray film. It is snug, but does not buckle and glides in easily. I cannot speak for any other holder.

So I already have a box of X-Ray ready to use. I bought it years ago for 7X11 and often cut to 5x7.

Why ULF? Because X-Ray film works just fine. That's why.

Sadly, last year I sold a box here of EFKE 7X17 as I thought I would never find a camera like this one. :(

Circles.

Len Middleton
3-Apr-2015, 20:18
Sadly, last year I sold a box here of EFKE 7X17 as I thought I would never find a camera like this one. :(

Circles.

Well June is approaching and many ULF photographers know that means the opportunity to order Ilford ULF film...

Randy Moe
3-Apr-2015, 20:23
Well June is approaching and many ULF photographers know that means the opportunity to order Ilford ULF film...

:)

Jim Fitzgerald
3-Apr-2015, 21:03
Or fill the freezer before June! :)

Oren Grad
3-Apr-2015, 21:10
Of course, I realized the OP would provoke a lot of responses, but really I had no idea of the support for ULF. Maybe we should consider a ULF sub-forum... :rolleyes: ...Like APUG has. *ahem!*

This would make a great opening thread...

We could ask Jack Flesher whether the GetDPI crew would mind our following their MF digital forum in borrowing from Dante:

"Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here"

Randy Moe
3-Apr-2015, 21:17
Or fill the freezer before June! :)

I'm eating frozen meat as fast as possible.

Sometimes I even heat it up...

Randy Moe
3-Apr-2015, 22:04
Just because.

I happen to have a Kodak 21.25" Copying Ektanon I gaff taped it to a B&J lensboard and focused in the studio at 28ft, this will be my first lens on the 7X17. I looked back to 2006 and some people here talked about trying one without any actual reports. Maybe I missed that thread.

Somebody said it has almost 600mm IC.

I gotta do better than gaff tape tomorrow as I don't want to drop this clean example.

What happened to that other project?...it's here somewhere...

more steak

Will Whitaker
4-Apr-2015, 05:45
More than enough coverage, Randy. Mine covers 12x20, which is my default test bed for coverage as it's the biggest camera I own.

Jim Fitzgerald
4-Apr-2015, 05:53
Randy, mine sovers my 8 x 20 with room to spare. Great sharp lens. So make a proper lens board please.

Randy Moe
4-Apr-2015, 07:58
Randy, mine sovers my 8 x 20 with room to spare. Great sharp lens. So make a proper lens board please.

Jim, of course and put a 1-3/4" packard behind it, which is too small, but I have it and it will stop the lense down to f13 for focusing, but I see myself shooting at f. 64 at least.

I will not be scanning 7x17, contacts only, or further adrift.

baro-nite
4-Apr-2015, 08:24
I should really stop following this thread. My ambition is contact printing with an 8x10, but now I'm having crazy thoughts. :eek:

Randy Moe
4-Apr-2015, 08:30
ULF is insidious mind control.

You know you want it.

scheinfluger_77
4-Apr-2015, 09:32
I'd never given ULF a second thought until following this forum. But if one were willing to challenge one's paradigm... why use a lens at all? A pinhole and it's softer cousin, the zone plate might produce some amazing contact prints. The larger problem as I see it is the availability of film holders. To get around that you could create a camera with some variation of a falling plate design.

Corran
4-Apr-2015, 09:53
My 8x20 back should be on its way back from Richard Ritter soon...
Just in time for the overwhelmingly hot season though. :(

Liquid Artist
4-Apr-2015, 10:10
I should really stop following this thread. My ambition is contact printing with an 8x10, but now I'm having crazy thoughts. :eek:
Bigger is Always Better, and you know you want it.
So treat yourself, and just do it.

Of course I can talk, since I don't own my own ULF yet.

Jim Fitzgerald
4-Apr-2015, 11:55
For those considering ULF let me say that yes film holders are expensive as is film but you have 11 x 14 and 14 x 17 x ray film to use. Now with that said if one is going to jump from say 8 x 10 to 11 x 14 I would advise you to look at 14 x 17 and compare. The 14 x 17 prints have a "presence" to them that is very pleasing to my eye. The down side is that the camera is much heavier. Still, a 14 x 17 contact print is something to see. Now off to develop 8 14 x 17 negatives from a recent trip to Yosemite!

jp
4-Apr-2015, 12:07
Shooting 14x17 xray film is pretty affordable too. (compared to 8x10 kodak or 14x17 anything)

Tracy Storer
4-Apr-2015, 12:18
If memory serves, we USED to have a ULF category, pre vBulletin era, and maybe before hosting on this domain?

I don't remember the exact name of that sub-forum, but the gist was 11x14 and bigger.


Of course, I realized the OP would provoke a lot of responses, but really I had no idea of the support for ULF. Maybe we should consider a ULF sub-forum... :rolleyes: ...Like APUG has. *ahem!*


This would make a great opening thread...

Randy Moe
4-Apr-2015, 12:34
Yes, and I don't know where to put my new thread, which will be the story of my 7X17 camera, film holders, lenses, experiences, but not actual image capture. Only discussion and images to show ULF method, gear, etc.

I was about to post questions about 7x17, particularly lenses, but we may as well get this right the first time.

I also have old thread info from 2006, that needs updating and republishing.

So mods how do we continue?

This thread is not a place to start that conversation.

'ULF only thread, above 8x10?' which would add 10x12, 10x10 and other square formats that WP uses,

Randy Moe
4-Apr-2015, 12:37
I just sent a black triangle request to mods.

for

"ULF only, above 8X10"

jb7
4-Apr-2015, 12:49
I have a vague recollection of a ULF print exchange here once-
If only we had someone with a proven track record in organizing print exchanges...

Randy Moe
4-Apr-2015, 12:53
I have a vague recollection of a ULF print exchange here once-
If only we had someone with a proven track record in organizing print exchanges...

We do. Jim Becia is on #5.

I did one a year ago, that went smoothly, they are a PITA.

jb7
4-Apr-2015, 13:02
I know, I was on it, it did go smoothly...

Randy Moe
4-Apr-2015, 13:09
I know, I was on it, it did go smoothly...

ULF print exchange would greatly increase costs. Bigger prints, bigger shipping boxes, bigger bigger and then how does one mix and match ULF of differing size.

My 5X7 exchange was meant to be affordable to anyone.

I can remember some things more than a minute, but I did forget which JB specifically was member. :)

Thanks for the kind reminder.

StoneNYC
4-Apr-2015, 15:57
I would HIGHLY support an ULF sub category on the forum, just like the difference between medium format and LF, there's a huge working difference and knowledge/skill base in ULF work.

Or I could start a while new ULF forum ;)

Tracy Storer
4-Apr-2015, 17:00
Or I could start a while new ULF forum ;)

It's been done, several years ago an enthusiastic (but not especially knowledgable) fellow compiled as much data on ULF as he could find on the web, not all of it vetted or correct. There was some buzz, but it died down and he moved on, eventually allowing the domain to lapse.

Oh, and BTW, as to the OPs question: 1. contact prints, 2. ease of viewing the very large ground glass, 3. the "directness" of using a big camera to make big negs for big prints. 4. The possibility of very different looks, shallow depth of field wide open, versus apparent extreme sharpness stopped down, etc....

StoneNYC
4-Apr-2015, 17:12
It's been done, several years ago an enthusiastic (but not especially knowledgable) fellow compiled as much data on ULF as he could find on the web, not all of it vetted or correct. There was some buzz, but it died down and he moved on, eventually allowing the domain to lapse.

Oh, and BTW, as to the OPs question: 1. contact prints, 2. ease of viewing the very large ground glass, 3. the "directness" of using a big camera to make big negs for big prints. 4. The possibility of very different looks, shallow depth of field wide open, versus apparent extreme sharpness stopped down, etc....

Oh I didn't mean to actually have a site to personably give knowledge, I meant a forum to allow others to exchange knowledge, but I suppose it's such a small group that would be ULF it might not be worth the effort or might not be active enough. I see your point.

Jim Fitzgerald
4-Apr-2015, 18:10
Another reason is that when you develop film and get a 14 x 17 negative like this you can't wait to make a carbon print! This is my favorite Black Oak in Yosemite Valley. Sorry for the cell phone shot but it is hanging to dry.

Corran
4-Apr-2015, 18:16
Thanks for posting that Jim. I am about to shoot some 8x10 tomorrow with the intended printing medium to be Van Dyke Brown. I have never had great success with VDB because I tried to use negatives developed for silver printing or scanning. That image gives me a rough idea for what the density should look like visually. I have access to a densitometer but I don't know how accurate it is.

Jim Fitzgerald
4-Apr-2015, 18:25
Thanks for posting that Jim. I am about to shoot some 8x10 tomorrow with the intended printing medium to be Van Dyke Brown. I have never had great success with VDB because I tried to use negatives developed for silver printing or scanning. That image gives me a rough idea for what the density should look like visually. I have access to a densitometer but I don't know how accurate it is.

Well, because I shoot for carbon prints I'm always looking for scenes with a great range. I've had great success with this Oak. The light was early morning and bright. The scene itself has a lot of depth so that helps as well. I have not checked the DR on it but I'm guessing it will be in the 2.10 or so, maybe higher.
I used Bergger 200 rated at 80. #11 filter 24" Artar @ F-45 1/3 for 9:00. Developed in a tray with 4,000 ml. Pyrocat HD 2:2:100 for 8 minutes.
Hope this helps some.

Randy Moe
4-Apr-2015, 18:44
Well, because I shoot for carbon prints I'm always looking for scenes with a great range. I've had great success with this Oak. The light was early morning and bright. The scene itself has a lot of depth so that helps as well. I have not checked the DR on it but I'm guessing it will be in the 2.10 or so, maybe higher.
I used Bergger 200 rated at 80. #11 filter 24" Artar @ F-45 1/3 for 9:00. Developed in a tray with 4,000 ml. Pyrocat HD 2:2:100 for 8 minutes.
Hope this helps some.

Tech detail is always welcome. Thanks!

I repeated it so we get double exposure...

Corran
4-Apr-2015, 18:54
Tech detail is always welcome. Thanks!

I agree.

Scenes with a wide range from shadows to highlights are more than a little common down here, especially in spring/summer.

e
5-Apr-2015, 01:10
Jeeze...didn't know so many people were still into ULF...nice to see!
I haven't don't anything but digital for awhile now...years..
Thinking about dusting off the Wisner ULF's sitting in the closet for too long now...
Personally I like the 7x17 best..small light..big long neg..whats not to like..
I cant imagine at my age taking out the 16x20...but for inside...its just sweet...
And then..there is the 210xl...

Jim Fitzgerald
5-Apr-2015, 06:38
There are a lot of us out there. I still haul all of my ULF gear but each year it gets a little harder. My double wide stroller will see more use as the years roll on. Get that 16 x 20 out bid negs are great!

e
5-Apr-2015, 09:19
Still have to get a 16x20 contact printer..or a nice clean 18x22 piece of glass...starting to get the bug again..after 7 years off..

Tracy Storer
5-Apr-2015, 09:27
Still have to get a 16x20 contact printer..or a nice clean 18x22 piece of glass...starting to get the bug again..after 7 years off..

Do it Emile !

Jim Fitzgerald
5-Apr-2015, 10:43
Do it Emile !

+1

karl french
5-Apr-2015, 12:19
I think the point here is that the Korona Banquet and Panoramic cameras are different. The banquets generally do NOT have the bellows and hardware for rear extension and the panoramic models DO. Also the Banquet models are more often seen with the capability for front tilt.

Randy Moe
5-Apr-2015, 12:30
All things Korona 1915. Page down

http://piercevaubel.com/cam/catalogs/1915gundmanlp482.htm#page 26-27

Taija71A
5-Apr-2015, 12:39
Understood in full now Randy and Karl.
Thank-you for the updated clarification and explanations. Greatly appreciated!

I am very sorry about any confusion that I may have caused. Please accept my sincerest apology.

Happy shooting with your new 7x17 Randy! It certainly is a real 'Beauty'. :)
Best regards, -Tim.

Randy Moe
5-Apr-2015, 12:59
I think the point here is that the Korona Banquet and Panoramic cameras are different. The banquets generally do NOT have the bellows and hardware for rear extension and the panoramic models DO. Also the Banquet models are more often seen with the capability for front tilt.

Tilt makes sense for a Banquet camera as they were made specially for image capture of large groups of people, often from a tall tripod and tilt would be great for getting more faces in focus. But that model lacks front rise, which is good for landscape and cities, which the Panoramic does have, but it lacks front tilt. Both cameras are specialized.

One is not better, they are simply different.

TXFZ1
5-Apr-2015, 17:29
Interesting, the link shows that Korona had a Pixie roll film camera with some of the most ugliest pixies.

David

Thom Bennett
5-Apr-2015, 17:53
Ah, never really thought about the difference between banquet and panoramic but I'm glad you pointed this out. I have a 7x17 coming my way later this year and am looking forward to its format being a nice complement to the 8x10.


Tilt makes sense for a Banquet camera as they were made specially for image capture of large groups of people, often from a tall tripod and tilt would be great for getting more faces in focus. But that model lacks front rise, which is good for landscape and cities, which the Panoramic does have, but it lacks front tilt. Both cameras are specialized.

One is not better, they are simply different.

Randy Moe
5-Apr-2015, 19:01
To complicate my situation further, perhaps I should have bought a Banquet or a camera with front tilt as I will shooting from 16 ft tall old railroad causeway which is now a park. I bet I see plenty of below horizon shots...

Where's Richard Ritter when I can't afford him!

ULF is a dis ease. :)

Corran
5-Apr-2015, 19:05
I was going to say, I'd rather have tilt than rise/fall.

Though both would be preferred! My 8x20 has both, and swing. But I haven't shot it really to test the practicality of using them. Shot 8 sheets of 8x10 today though.

Randy Moe
5-Apr-2015, 19:16
I was going to say, I'd rather have tilt than rise/fall.

Though both would be preferred! My 8x20 has both, and swing. But I haven't shot it really to test the practicality of using them. Shot 8 sheets of 8x10 today though.

This was an affordable way into 7x17 and the camera is so nice, I'm almost afraid to touch it. Now the nicest camera I have, by far. OE GG and a matching original film holder that is also VGC. I found a bargain on 2 more new holders, so it's now a 6 shot. Bang bang as we say here or is that double tap?

Koronas have a superior spring back system that works really well, they talk about it in the 1915 brochure and it's true, the holder glides in, yet is held snugly.

I don't wish for anything else.

Louis Pacilla
5-Apr-2015, 19:24
Tilt makes sense for a Banquet camera as they were made specially for image capture of large groups of people, often from a tall tripod and tilt would be great for getting more faces in focus. But that model lacks front rise, which is good for landscape and cities, which the Panoramic does have, but it lacks front tilt. Both cameras are specialized.

One is not better, they are simply different.

While your "new born" enthusiasm is great this is how the misinformation gets started. I have both a Korona 8x20 & a Korona 12x20 and they both have plenty of rise/fall but the 12x20 has tilt as well. The "Panoramic View" had longer bellows and all the same movements as the Banquet minus tilt. The very last "Panoramic View" models may have had tilt .

Oh Yea! Congrats on the Panoramic View 7x17.

Randy Moe
5-Apr-2015, 20:34
Newborn enthusiasm is often killed at birth.

Thanks!

Jim Fitzgerald
5-Apr-2015, 20:50
Newborn enthusiasm is often killed at birth.

Thanks!

Never when it comes to ULF!

Old-N-Feeble
5-Apr-2015, 21:16
Newborn enthusiasm is often killed at birth.

Thanks!

Nahh... remember when every baby was spanked immediately on entrance into this world? It's good for the character.:D Anyway, I expect you'll be doing plenty of self-flagellation as you learn to use that behemoth.;)

Randy Moe
5-Apr-2015, 22:20
Nahh... remember when every baby was spanked immediately on entrance into this world? It's good for the character.:D Anyway, I expect you'll be doing plenty of self-flagellation as you learn to use that behemoth.;)

It weighs far less than my C1.

My rule is, you touch me or mine, I touch back.

Tag

Craig Roberts
6-Apr-2015, 18:05
ULF...

Would you believe the Flip Wilson defense, "the devil made me do it!" That's OK, I don't believe it either.

The story I like tell is the the 12 x 20 is my mid-life crisis. I couldn't afford a Porsche and no 20-year old would go out with me, so I decided to build a 12 x 20.

Reality: I had been printing negatives from my trips to White Sands. I rarely print bigger that 11x14 but some of the White Sands images demanded a larger presence. I didn't like the look of 16 x 20 and started cropping to about 12 x 20. Then the ULF camera madness started, why not shoot to size??? It has been 9-years, there is no hope left for me. I'll be back at White Sands soon with the beast (12 x 20).

Craig

131937

part of the stable:

131938

Old-N-Feeble
6-Apr-2015, 18:20
131937

Is there supposed to be an image of sand dunes? I don't see any sand. I can't move my eyes away from the center of the photo.

dsphotog
6-Apr-2015, 18:38
Craig's camera makes that Majestic tripod look small.

Jim Fitzgerald
6-Apr-2015, 18:42
Well Craig I must say that is impressive! Now not to compete but I'm so lucky that I was able to build 4 ULF cameras and two of them are 14 x 17!

I was also able to get a Porsche Turbo and my girl and I act like 20 somethings! What is not to love!

StoneNYC
6-Apr-2015, 18:50
ULF...

Would you believe the Flip Wilson defense, "the devil made me do it!" That's OK, I don't believe it either.

The story I like tell is the the 12 x 20 is my mid-life crisis. I couldn't afford a Porsche and no 20-year old would go out with me, so I decided to build a 12 x 20.

Reality: I had been printing negatives from my trips to White Sands. I rarely print bigger that 11x14 but some of the White Sands images demanded a larger presence. I didn't like the look of 16 x 20 and started cropping to about 12 x 20. Then the ULF camera madness started, why not shoot to size??? It has been 9-years, there is no hope left for me. I'll be back at White Sands soon with the beast (12 x 20).

Craig

131937

part of the stable:

131938

Good thing you typed "part of the stable" after the first pic ;)

Also, did you build the subject matter in the first image or just the camera? Looks like a really nice design, small even, the framework I mean is really tight and so I would suspect easier to carry?

Corran
6-Apr-2015, 18:53
I was also able to get a Porsche Turbo

But, does the 14x17 and all accouterments fit in it??

Jim Fitzgerald
6-Apr-2015, 18:54
But, does the 14x17 and all accouterments fit in it??

Believe it or not it does fit!

sanking
6-Apr-2015, 19:06
Here is an image of me with a hand-made 20X24, from 1998 or 1999. The print is a palladium over cyanotype by my friend Sam Wang. He calls this one "Sandy and His 20X24." The lens I was using at the time was a very early 19" Goerz Dagor, but my best negatives with this camera were with a 450 mm f/9 Nikkor-M, which stopped down to f/90 or f/128 covered nicely for contact printing.

You can see more of Sam's work, including other examples of hand-crafted work, as well as his signature round figure and landscape work, at http://www.samwang.us

Sandy

Randy Moe
6-Apr-2015, 19:13
Ok, who can show bigger than 20X24...

Looking good Sandy!

StoneNYC
6-Apr-2015, 19:18
Here is an image of me with a hand-made 20X24, from 1998 or 1999. The print is a palladium over cyanotype by my friend Sam Wang. He calls this one "Sandy and His 20X24." The lens I was using at the time was a very early 19" Goerz Dagor, but my best negatives with this camera were with a 450 mm f/9 Nikkor-M, which stopped down to f/90 or f/128 covered nicely for contact printing.

You can see more of Sam's work, including other examples of hand-crafted work, as well as his signature round figure and landscape work, at http://www.samwang.us

Sandy

Wait you're saying the 450 M illuminates 20x24 at f/90??? That's insane! I knew it covered 14x17 but didn't realize it could reach 20x24.

By the way nice design! Looks great!

Too bad you don't still use it :/ (I don't think?)

Fun shot :)

Craig Roberts
6-Apr-2015, 19:22
Jim,

You win!

Actually, we all win.

Craig

Craig Roberts
6-Apr-2015, 19:24
Old-N-Feeble

sand? I'll have to check

Jim Fitzgerald
6-Apr-2015, 19:57
Craig, yes we all win! But you have the pretty models to shoot!!

Gary Tarbert
7-Apr-2015, 06:53
,Wow ,I am amazed at the response to this question , There are obviousely a lot of very passionate ULF shooters on this forum , I was asking the question really based on the experience of jumping from 5x4 to 5x8 and 8x10 , with each jump in format came restrictions and new challenges , And quite frankly improvements in technique were required , I find 4x5 far easier to shoot than 8x10 , So it got me thinking what about these guys shooting up to 16 x 20 where diffraction and D.O. F issues are multiplied , i don't think i will get the opportunity to try ULF here in Western Australia as the people shooting it here is Zero , But i will keep an open mind and if the opportunity arose i would give it a try

plaubel
7-Apr-2015, 13:11
I am new in ULF 12x16", and your question is one, which I asked to myself after riding this beasts.
Life had been a bit easier before...

Enjoying the pure size, enjoying the wonderful lenses, this special feeling in using the big machine, the view of the groundglass, the feeling of the right photography for me,the "products" - this may be reasons enough to me.

But now it feels like I graded up my complete LF photography, that is a good reason to me.

And I want to start up with alternative processes by contacting next time - this has been the first reason.
Luckily, if I feel weak, I am able to shoot with 5x7" or 4x5".
A lot of fantastic options !

Cheers,
Ritchie

Lachlan 717
7-Apr-2015, 13:57
i don't think i will get the opportunity to try ULF here in Western Australia as the people shooting it here is Zero

Gary,

Why is this stopping you? I didn't know anyone here in Melbourne shooting ULF but still jumped at it.

Might have to look at building an 11x14 and a 12x20 soon as well.

Gary Tarbert
7-Apr-2015, 17:10
Gary,

Why is this stopping you? I didn't know anyone here in Melbourne shooting ULF but still jumped at it.

Might have to look at building an 11x14 and a 12x20 soon as well. hi lachlan ,because i only want to try it , Not buy it only to discover it's not for me , But i do travel to Melbourne occasionally ....

Lachlan 717
7-Apr-2015, 18:04
hi lachlan ,because i only want to try it , Not buy it only to discover it's not for me , But i do travel to Melbourne occasionally ....

I'd be more than happy to show you the 7x17" if you get over here!!*

Just let me know when; we can head out for a day's shooting.

*I take NO responsibility for you then heading back West and buying ULF....

Gary Tarbert
7-Apr-2015, 18:43
I'd be more than happy to show you the 7x17" if you get over here!!*

Just let me know when; we can head out for a day's shooting.

*I take NO responsibility for you then heading back West and buying ULF....Sounds great . I will let you know when i am coming , Hopefully it works with your schedule . Cheers Gary

TML74
28-Apr-2015, 13:24
because we are crazy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwI5By945R0
Thierry M.L.

sanking
28-Apr-2015, 18:53
because we are crazy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwI5By945R0
Thierry M.L.

Nice video. One of those guys could have been me, on another day and on a different continent.

Yes, we are crazy. But perhaps as in the song by Waylon Jennings, "I have always been crazy, but it has kept me from going insane."

Sandy