PDA

View Full Version : What lens will work for a 35x35 inch ULF mammoth wet plate camera?



gerry yaum
27-May-2017, 13:14
Hey everyone please help. I am out of my element on how to proceed. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

I am buying a mammoth wet plate camera, maybe one of the biggest in the world. It is a 35x35 inch view camera made in the Czech Republic.

The eventual goal is to travel Canada with a cube van darkroom and camping trailer creating a major wet plate project documenting what it is to be Canadian. Landscapes and portraits made with the HF3535, and my other view cameras (4x5 to 16x20).

Here is my question...WHAT LENS or WHAT SINGLE LENS will work for me? 47 inch Red Dot Goertz Artar? (I own a 42 inch, that might kinda work, not sure if has enough coverage). What lens will have the coverage I need? What will work for me? What lens should I seek out that will cover 35x35?

This is all 5 years or so in the future. Am currently doing documentary photo work in Asia, the wet plate project is for my retirement.

Should be fun carrying around a 80-100lb camera plus extras.

Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com
gerryyaum@gmail.com

Luis-F-S
27-May-2017, 13:42
Especially at retirement age! I'd use the 42" you have and keep an eye out for a 47"! A 70" Artar will certainly cover if you could ever find one. Post some photos of the camera when you get it! L

MAubrey
27-May-2017, 14:16
A 47" would certainly work.

Also: If you're not shooting at infinity for the majority of your work, your 42" might be fine for a lot of stuff, too. 35"x"35 is basically three feet square, so even at 1:1 you're looking at a nice waist up portrait and at 1:2 a decent full body portrait. At both those magnifications, the image circle of your 42" is going to cover the frame.

Dan Fromm
27-May-2017, 14:16
Gerry, if this catalog http://web.archive.org/web/20170123102223/http://cameraeccentric.com/html/info/goerz_3.html is to be believed, a 42" Apo-Artar covers 21 x 24 plus 15% at infinity. 36.7 inches. You need 49.5.

Many posters here say that for contact printing process lenses cover much more than catalogs claim. A 47.5 incher will cover, the catalog says, 42.4 inches.

Perhaps you should look for a six foot lens from Goerz, Nikon or Rodenstock. Alternatively, use your monster for portraits and your smaller cameras for landscapes.

Oren Grad
27-May-2017, 14:21
Threads merged - please don't launch multiple threads on the same topic in different subforums.

gerry yaum
27-May-2017, 14:41
Ok thanks Luis, will do. If you ever see one about please send me a note or email.

Gerry
gerryyaum@gmail.com

gerry yaum
27-May-2017, 14:47
M Audrey thanks so much, that is comforting. Now all I need is a flange for the lens. Will look for longer lens to shoot at infinity for distant landscapes. Here is my lens.

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.ca/2016/06/bought-huge-42-inch-1066mm-process-lens.html

gerry yaum
27-May-2017, 14:50
Thanks Dan...I have others tell me the 47 inch is what I need to find, somehow! Interesting thought..big camera for portraits, small for landscapes. Heck I love portraiture so that might work. Not sure what a 6 foot lens is.

Thanks Gerry

gerry yaum
27-May-2017, 14:51
sorry OWEN am a newby here, was unsure where to put what..after the first attempt was not sure I would get any replies at all or if it was in the right location. This current thread is actually the repost (2nd) of the original which I guess I placed in the wrong area.

Thanks

Dan Fromm
27-May-2017, 15:30
Thanks Dan...I have others tell me the 47 inch is what I need to find, somehow! Interesting thought..big camera for portraits, small for landscapes. Heck I love portraiture so that might work. Not sure what a 6 foot lens is.

Thanks GerrySix feet is approximately 70 inches, 1800 mm. Six footers were made, are scarce and usually quite expensive.

Oren Grad
27-May-2017, 15:34
sorry OWEN am a newby here, was unsure where to put what..after the first attempt was not sure I would get any replies at all or if it was in the right location. This current thread is actually the repost (2nd) of the original which I guess I placed in the wrong area.

No sweat... carry on, and good luck!

xkaes
27-May-2017, 16:14
Fujinon made a 1200mm (47") lens, but you'll never find one.

Alan Gales
27-May-2017, 17:12
My Artar is only 19". Should I be embarrassed?

gerry yaum
28-May-2017, 04:12
Six feet is approximately 70 inches, 1800 mm. Six footers were made, are scarce and usually quite expensive.

wow OK 1800mm/70 inch lens...that is something that might take a lifetime to find. I will keep looking for lens that work. I plan on starting the major part of the project when I am about 58. I am 53 now. I cannot wait too long as I will not be able to handle the gear when I get too old. My father was moving fridges up stairs by himself at 73, hope I have this stamina and strength at that age. Thanks for your help.

Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com

Michael Jones
28-May-2017, 06:52
Generally speaking, most process lenses have a 43-46 degree angle of view. As I recall the formula, simplistically that means your image circle for infinity will be about 85% of the focal length. Thus, for your approx. 49" diagonal, you "should" have a lens about 58". There are a few 60" lenses out there, Rodenstock made a 70" and there are 72" RD Artars. All are amazingly scarce. On the other hand, My experience with long process lenses is stopped down to f32 or f45, their image circle equals their focal length. Things may not be perfect at the fringes, but for wet plate or contact work, I doubt you'll notice.

You may want to ask Luther Gurlach for his input; for this size wet plate, I'd venture he is the most knowledgable.

BTW, why do you want to mount this in an Ilex 5 for wet plate? Having done it a bit, your exposures will be in seconds (many seconds I suspect for this format). The right lens caps will be just as appropriate. And the going price for an Ilex 5 you want to buy is about $300 plus another $100 for an overhaul. Figure another $100 for the proper flange, if missing, and mounting your board.

Good luck!

Mike

Dan Fromm
28-May-2017, 08:54
Gerry, every couple of months a person whose dream is making gigantic negatives with, naturally, a gigantic camera posts a request for information about lenses with gigantic coverage here. The answer is always the same. There aren't many, they're uncommon and hard to find and are usually quite expensive. Depending on how gigantic the dream is, the dream lens may not even exist.

Many of the dreamers want to shoot life-size or near life-size portraits as has been done by, e.g., Richard Learoyd. They find lenses that will do relatively easily because image circles get larger as magnification increases. Learoyd, for example, uses, if I recall correctly, a 760 Apo-Ronar.

Some of the dreamers, like you, want to shoot landscapes. They all run into unpleasant facts. Rodenstock claims that Apo-Ronars with focal lengths 890 mm and longer cover 40 degrees. Boyer and Nikon claim less coverage for their equivalent lenses.

If I were you I'd beg, borrow or steal the use of a camera at least as large as the 35" x 35" monster you've ordered and shoot a couple of paper negatives of landscape with the 42" Apo Artar. Then you'll know whether that lens can do what you need. I don't think it will, but I've been wrong before.

I suggest doing the experiment because you know what you want to accomplish and what image quality you'll settle for. All the rest of us can do is speculate and repeat manufacturers' claims that may not be correct or relevant.

Amedeus
28-May-2017, 11:22
wow OK 1800mm/70 inch lens...that is something that might take a lifetime to find. I will keep looking for lens that work. I plan on starting the major part of the project when I am about 58. I am 53 now. I cannot wait too long as I will not be able to handle the gear when I get too old. My father was moving fridges up stairs by himself at 73, hope I have this stamina and strength at that age. Thanks for your help.

Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com

Nikon made two APO designs, one 1800mm, the other 1780mm, f14 and won't fit in an ILEX #5 shutter, at these apertures, no need for fast speeds. A large Packard shutter or a lens cap will work for slow emulsions like wet plate or paper negatives/positives.

Rodenstock had the 1800mm f16 Ronar.

Goerz had the 1780mm RDA, f16.

I've see on average one of these each year for sale since I acquired the Goerz. No different for the 1200mm or the 47" versions which won't cover 35x35" at infinity. (1:1 portraits do work though.)

And as you can surmise from the posts, be prepared to break the piggy bank.

Good luck,

Rudi A.

Monty McCutchen
28-May-2017, 11:39
165517165518165519165521Well 35 x 35 is out of my league to be sure so I'll defer to those who have already chimed in as Dan and others have consistently been excellent sources of information on the technical aspects and capabilities of various lenses. I don't think we are appreciative enough of their expertise and what valuable resources they have become for our community here. I tend to have far fewer post as I usually only contribute to my immediate level of experience. I shoot 20 x 24 Ambrotypes and film negatives for Pt/Pd and have various lenses that fit those needs. The suggestion I have since this is a five year out/retirement project is to start to envision the project through the available syntax of the gear instead of trying to find the gear for the syntax of your vision. So for example for life size portrait headshot you could be using a 355 G-Claron on my 20 x 24 and even get bigger than life size head shots, which of course also reduces your bellows extension necessary for such portraiture. For my portraiture on the 20 x 24 I use a 22 inch 550 Schneider Fine Art Lens, which allows for beautiful portraits all the way from full body to bigger than life size shoulder/head shots. It is also a fantastically sharp semi-wide landscape lens in that format. For a tighter look in landscapes I use 1000 mm Germinar (sp?) that is very sharp. For my wet plate work in that format I use a 30 inch Dallmeyer RR, and a 37 inch Dallmeyer 8D which took me 5 years to find. Since you are having the camera made have inserts made for your wet plate holders that will take smaller plates that fit the various lens capabilities and then fit it to our vision as you traverse the Canadian countryside. If you are shooting film too then have a reducing back made for 20 x 24 then buy Ilford film in their annual run and you can shoot film too. I had both a 20 x 24 back and 16 x 20 back made for my Ebony and I don't regret it all as both get used frequently. You have an incredible vision in front of you don't have it limited by gear. Let the gear be there in all its mulititude to give you choices at each stop.

Here are a few shots with the above mentioned lenses as well as a picture of my daughter holding the 8D

gerry yaum
28-May-2017, 19:46
Fujinon made a 1200mm (47") lens, but you'll never find one.

never heard of it, will check into thanks

gerry yaum
28-May-2017, 19:47
My Artar is only 19". Should I be embarrassed?

haha....got one of those too....cute lens...

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.ca/2017/04/bought-me-goerz-apochromat-artar-red.html

Arne Croell
29-May-2017, 14:37
never heard of it, will check into thanks
See
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?70052-Fujinon-1200mm-F24-Lens-Found!!!

Dan Fromm
7-Jun-2017, 16:10
180 cm Apo Tessar. http://www.westlicht-auction.com/index.php?id=4&L=1 See lot 514.

Stop dreaming, start bidding.

goamules
8-Jun-2017, 06:44
I missed this thread last month. But Monty is right, photographers need to first find the lens, and then decide what size plates they can make. Not the other way around. So many people have contacted me over the years requesting an impossible set of parameters, such as the proverbial Petzval that is Big, Fast, and Cheap (pick any 2). Or needing to cover a size that requires a lens a rare as hen's teeth.

If and when I decide to shoot my 47" Hermagis Aplanat (rapid rectilinear) that's exactly what I will do. Mount it temporarily in a dark room window, or a giant box, and SEE what it covers. Make plate holders accordingly.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2824/9618992282_58a67e6de4_z.jpg

Fr. Mark
8-Jun-2017, 21:30
Y'all are amazing. I thought an 18" cooke triplet at f3.6 was huge.

Dan Fromm
9-Jun-2017, 05:23
Y'all are amazing. I thought an 18" cooke triplet at f3.6 was huge.

Tiny little lens of nothing at all. IF you want to see huge, look at: http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/t1524.html. I've seen it, it was being used as a coffee table.

Taija71A
9-Jun-2017, 09:57
_
Tyson Yerkes 18 000mm f/18 (1016mm Diameter) Lens:
__________________

165911
__________________

gerry yaum
9-Jun-2017, 14:42
Whats the difference? If you know the lens are out there, if you have 5 years to find that 1 lens, what is the big deal? It will happen. If you can get a deal on the camera now, then buy buy buy now. If you can get the lens deal now then buy buy now. It does not matter which comes first. I got the deal on the camera first so went for it! Too many photogs spend too much time waiting and planning, never ever doing what they hoped, you got to jump in head first some time and go all in.

I think the concept of what your doing (35x35 ambrotypes) is more important, the work created with the tools is all that matters. The lens I want is out there (one is enough), are available, I have seen them being used. It does not matter to me if I buy the cart or the horse first. 5 years from now both will be trotting down the creative road together.

gerry yaum
9-Jun-2017, 14:42
_
Tyson Yerkes 18 000mm f/18 (1016mm Diameter) Lens:
__________________

165911
__________________

Wow now that's a lens!

Mark Sampson
9-Jun-2017, 18:58
It's the largest refracting (lens) telescope ever made. At the Yerkes Observatory (in Wisconsin? it's a long time since I thought about it.)

Fr. Mark
9-Jun-2017, 19:04
They took the iris and shutter off? This is almost as bad as those people who cut huge logs into standard lengths instead of leaving them for major building beams for timber framing!

Why wet plate instead of dry plate? Wet plate is much more dangerous, difficult (I think) and I believe one could get the same look if you used the right emulsion making techniques. I'm speculating, not typing from experience. It's a free country in a limited sense, do what you want. I thought I might do wet plate. It was a major justification for the big (to me) Cooke triplet lens. But when I think about the materials involved, and the requirements for taking a darkroom with you, and a look that could be duplicated with hand made gelatin emulsions, or even sensitive blue X-ray film, I am mystified by the appeal.

Steven Tribe
10-Jun-2017, 02:56
Sorry, but this is an ill thought out project. As quite a few experienced members have pointed out!

Obviously the acquisition of a suitable lens is the very first step. Then you have to work out the design of the front standard to cope with the weight and the physical dimensions.

I find it hard to believe that you will be able to manage working with 35x35" glass plates. I think you will have to go above standard glass thickness to ensure your own safety.

Finally there is the question of wet plates. I have been through the process with up to 1/2 plate size in a very well ventilated basement and this was still a very olfactory experience, to put it mildly!. Moving over to an enclosed space (van/tent?) with about 60 times the surface area of a 1/2 plate will lead to temporary/permanent damage! I just can't imagine how you can do pouring, unless you use wear a breathing apparatus.

gerry yaum
10-Jun-2017, 07:54
Why ill thought out? in what way? I find that many photo folk, especially large format photogs where the crowd is older are sort of negative when it comes to grand projects. They sort of see things as glasses 1/2 full. You got to think out of the box if you want to do something grand. You cannot be a negative Nelly and expect to do new and exciting things.

Obviously the acquisition of a suitable lens is the very first step....

I bought my lens 10 minutes ago. It is a 1922 brass lens recommended to me by some kind folk here. It cost a fortune but I got it done. I am 4 years 11 months ahead of schedule there. Told you it was not a problem. The lens are out there if you want to pay for them. I got mine in record time. I am off to Thailand soon for 6 months of picture taking but on my return plan on shipping this off to SK Grimes to get a flange, waterhouse stops and caps.

Here is the lens I bought for the project
http://www.auction2000.se/auk/w.Object?inC=WLPA&inA=20161007_1045&inO=514


Then you have to work out the design of the front standard to cope with the weight and the physical dimensions.

Yes thought that out earlier. Have spoken to the camera builder several times on the front standard strength.size thing. I have been reassured that it is not a problem.


I find it hard to believe that you will be able to manage working with 35x35" glass plates.

Why? That seems like more negative thought. Fail before you try type thinking. I know of one photographer (you do also) that makes 26x32 tintypes...so why not ambrotypes measuring 35x35? I have a link on my blog of people making giant (bigger than 35x35) ambrotypes in the late 1800 in Australia. If they can do it back then why can a determined photographer not do it now? We have modern vehicles etc.
Here is that link:
http://gerryyaum.blogspot.ca/2017/05/worlds-largest-wet-plate-negs.html

Finally there is the question of wet plates. I have been through the process with up to 1/2 plate size in a very well ventilated basement and this was still a very olfactory experience, to put it mildly!. Moving over to an enclosed space (van/tent?) with about 60 times the surface area of a 1/2 plate will lead to temporary/permanent damage! I just can't imagine how you can do pouring, unless you use wear a breathing apparatus.

Ian Ruhter is doing it here...(have emailed him for advice and spoken to him)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c7RT7BsIbc&t=789s

Much larger work than 35x35. He did not see the negative stuff, he just went out and did it. You got to have a dream, you got to chase down that dream. I will be wearing a ventilator for much of the process as needed. The thought right now is to use a converted ambulance like Jack Lowe in the UK. I might have an exhaust system in that baby.

http://lifeboatstationproject.com/ (have emailed him and spoken to him for advice as well)

I have also done more difficult projects in my lifetime. Currently I am shooting families who live in a garbage dump in Thailand. Been doing that for 3 years. Previously I did a series on sex workers in Thailand. Shot over 3 different periods 2007-2009-2012, 8x10, speedotron system, studio, learned the Thai language etc. This "Oh! Canada" wet plate project seems simple in comparison to those. I will not have to speak Thai, I will not have to walk in garbage and step on nails (did that) while covered in flies etc.

Sex worker project photos here:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/behold/2014/01/09/gerry_yaum_photographs_sex_workers_in_pattaya_thailand_in_his_exhibition.html

"Families of the Dump" photos here:

http://gerryyaum.wixsite.com/photo/forgotten-laughter

I think the key is to stop being negative and instead of finding ways and reasons you cannot do a project, find ways to make it work. Keep it positive, photographic artists can do ANYTHING! You and I can do anything we want as long as we want it enough. Nothing can stop us!

Thanks everyone for your help. I now have my lens thanks to you all!! Using a piece of 100 year old period glass for this project just made everything that much better. Thanks so much!!

Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com

bob carnie
10-Jun-2017, 08:43
Go Gerry Go - I will look forward to your project . When in Toronto visit.

Bob

Amedeus
10-Jun-2017, 08:56
Tiny little lens of nothing at all. IF you want to see huge, look at: http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/t1524.html. I've seen it, it was being used as a coffee table.

I have one of those ;-) ... lol ...

Amedeus
10-Jun-2017, 08:57
Obviously the acquisition of a suitable lens is the very first step....

I bought my lens 10 minutes ago. It is a 1922 brass lens recommended to me by some kind folk here. It cost a fortune but I got it done. I am 4 years 11 months ahead of schedule there. Told you it was not a problem. The lens are out there if you want to pay for them. I got mine in record time. I am off to Thailand soon for 6 months of picture taking but on my return plan on shipping this off to SK Grimes to get a flange, waterhouse stops and caps.

Here is the lens I bought for the project
http://www.auction2000.se/auk/w.Object?inC=WLPA&inA=20161007_1045&inO=514


Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com


Congrats and good luck ! That was a great price btw in light of what the more modern versions go for, great move !

Rudi A.

gerry yaum
10-Jun-2017, 11:26
They took the iris and shutter off? This is almost as bad as those people who cut huge logs into standard lengths instead of leaving them for major building beams for timber framing!

Why wet plate instead of dry plate? Wet plate is much more dangerous, difficult (I think) and I believe one could get the same look if you used the right emulsion making techniques. I'm speculating, not typing from experience. It's a free country in a limited sense, do what you want. I thought I might do wet plate. It was a major justification for the big (to me) Cooke triplet lens. But when I think about the materials involved, and the requirements for taking a darkroom with you, and a look that could be duplicated with hand made gelatin emulsions, or even sensitive blue X-ray film, I am mystified by the appeal.

MARK

I just love the look that 3d like ambrotypes give when you look THROUGH the glass at the creamy image...BEAUTY! The appeal is working in an ancient process creating unique ONE OF A KIND works. Now that I have a 100 year old lens to do it with, the thing seems even more pure.

Take some time studying orginal ambrotypes....never seen anything quite that beau

gerry yaum
10-Jun-2017, 11:31
Go Gerry Go - I will look forward to your project . When in Toronto visit.

Bob

Thanks Bob..for your enthusiasm. Far from a done deal, and it is very likely I will fail in the attempt. Still I would rather live with the failure than the regret of not trying. I agree with some of the people I was a tad critical of earlier, this is a tough go, and will be very difficult to accomplish. But that's part of the fun, if it was easy everyone would do it! It will all be documented on the blog. Might eventually make up a separate blog or webpage to show the evolution of the project/work.

Will visit when I am in Toronto.

Thanks Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com
www.gerryyaumfilms.blogspot.com

Mark Sampson
10-Jun-2017, 17:51
Gerry, go get 'em! A quick look at your pictures linked above suggests that you'll be successful. Looking forward to seeing results, whenever you have some.

Lachlan 717
10-Jun-2017, 18:31
Specs listed indicate that it doesn't come close to 35x35" at infinity...

Dan Fromm
10-Jun-2017, 18:36
Oh, my. I just read the auction's description closely.


covering huge 120x150cm at 1:1 magnification

If true, this means 60x75cm at infinity. 24" x 30". Oh, my.

Steven Tribe
11-Jun-2017, 01:55
My suggested outline of procedure was based on the information you had given in this thread about getting the camera made. When you get the lens flange made at Grimes, it would be a idea to it made oversize (that is, a square plate), so the retaining screws are quite some distance away from the hole in the lens board/Front standard panel so you can use alternative lenses on the same wooden panel.

I still feel the extreme difficulties of transporting, preparing and using 35x35" glass plates is a good way to end up with very little surplus energy for the "artistic" side of photography.

No doubt but that you have purchased an excellent tessar and at F14 you can get a viewable image. In spite of the mentioned problems of coverage at landscape. distances, it may be OK at small apertures.

ridax
11-Jun-2017, 02:07
Re: Process lenses' coverage...

Those are different. Celor type ones do not improve in their edge sharpness when stopped down. Tessar type lenses are much better as "poor man's wideangles". The more sophisticated 6-elements lenses are often sharp up to the edges of their illuminated field, regardless of the tight field restrictions stated in the manufacturer's publications (which are relevant for high-end process work such as mapping).

My own first-hand experience with Rodenstock Apo-Ronar CL 1200mm f/16, 6/6 version, and CZJ Apo-Germinar 1000mm f/12 showed both covered exactly the same field of about 126 cm (~50") at infinity with no vignetting at f/32. At wider stops, edge sharpness was also OK but there was a lot of light fall-off.

(The Germinar was smaller and lighter in weight though and more manageable in the field giving me more spare angle coverage for tilts.)

Mark Sawyer
11-Jun-2017, 12:01
Why wet plate instead of dry plate? Wet plate is much more dangerous, difficult (I think) and I believe one could get the same look if you used the right emulsion making techniques...

The OP wants to make Ambrotypes. Wet plate is the only process I know of where the negative image reverses to a positive on a black background.

I see that Gerry bought a 180cm Tessar, which should suit his project well. Equivalent to a 20-inch lens on 10x10-inch format, it would be a perfect focal length for traditional portraiture, though slow for portraits on wet plate. That won't be an issue for landscapes though.

angusparker
11-Jun-2017, 14:48
Exciting. Can't wait to see the results. Why don't you drive around the country to LFPF members? You'll probably get many willing assistants to help you with your picture taking. I might even bring out my mini-camera for comparison sake (only 14x17").

Mark Sampson
11-Jun-2017, 18:57
180cm lens = 12 feet of bellows @ 1:1, or around 9 feet at 1:2, I think. Only 6 feet at infinity.
Sign me up- I'll volunteer to assist on that shoot. Mr. Yaum will need some help.

Matt Stage
13-Jun-2017, 00:52
You might want to contact Kurt Moser. He does a lot of ULF wetplate work in the Dolomites and has just completed building a camera of a similar size to the one you describe. He has the Apo-Nikkor 1780mm f14 to do the job.
http://www.lightcatcher.it/en/

For a different look, I certainly would not sneeze at the Wollaston Meniscus lenses that Reinhold Schable is making. Currently his largest ULF lens is 790mm f5.6 and has lots of coverage -- he might be induced to work with you to produce a larger lens to meet your needs. http://re-inventedphotoequip.com/ULF%20Lens.html

goamules
13-Jun-2017, 08:59
...I bought my lens 10 minutes ago. It is a 1922 brass lens recommended to me by some kind folk here. It cost a fortune but I got it done. I am 4 years 11 months ahead of schedule there. Told you it was not a problem. The lens are out there if you want to pay for them. I got mine in record time. I am off to Thailand soon for 6 months of picture taking but on my return plan on shipping this off to SK Grimes to get a flange, waterhouse stops and caps.

Here is the lens I bought for the project
http://www.auction2000.se/auk/w.Object?inC=WLPA&inA=20161007_1045&inO=514

...

I think the key is to stop being negative and instead of finding ways and reasons you cannot do a project, find ways to make it work. Keep it positive, photographic artists can do ANYTHING! You and I can do anything we want as long as we want it enough. Nothing can stop us!

Thanks everyone for your help. I now have my lens thanks to you all!! Using a piece of 100 year old period glass for this project just made everything that much better. Thanks so much!!

Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com

It looks like you are a serious photographer, and do some intensive work. I commend you on not being dissuaded by anything anyone has said here. I was not trying to stop your goal, I was just recommending you buy the lens first, and then decide what size it will cover and what plate size you can use. Which looks like what you are about to do, if Dan is right, the lens you jumped on for $7,300 won't cover the 35X35" you wanted.

I think why we were responding so cautiously is that someone asks about making "the BIGGEST" wetplates every year. Many have great intentions, though some just want to make "the biggest" and win some unstated competition. Almost all of them want to make Mammoth plates, but have no money. So they usually are asking how they can do this, cheap. Often wanting to spend less on a lens than they will for the silver nitrate to make the bath.

If you had said money is no object, that you were willing to spend anything to get it done, then most of us would have said "of course you can do this." Not many people will buy a $7,000 lens without knowing if it will A) cover, B) be fast enough, C) fit on a lensboard, or D) have a camera with enough bellows. But money can fix all kinds of bothersome problems.

gerry yaum
14-Jun-2017, 21:15
Gerry, go get 'em! A quick look at your pictures linked above suggests that you'll be successful. Looking forward to seeing results, whenever you have some.

Thanks Mark...I plan on starting the ambrotype project in about 5 years time. Will be working wet plate in smaller formats 8x10 and a 16x20 Chamonix before that. Will sort of work my way up to the 35x35. I need to improve my ability/knowledge in wet plate which is limited. Plan to do my second wet plate workshop this time with Quinn Jacobson in 2018. Need to learn lots there.

First thou am off to Asia for 6 months, plan on shooting the 8x10 Deardorff and some Tri-x on the "Families of the Dump" series. All those efforts will be documented on the blog.

Thanks for your note. Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com

gerry yaum
14-Jun-2017, 21:18
Exciting. Can't wait to see the results. Why don't you drive around the country to LFPF members? You'll probably get many willing assistants to help you with your picture taking. I might even bring out my mini-camera for comparison sake (only 14x17").

Angus...Will be doing this in Canada, most of you guys are in the States I believe, not sure I will be going down there. Might be hard to explain the darkroom truck filled with semi toxic chemistry to the very suspicious border guards. I do like the idea of visiting Canadian Large Format people. Can take the camera around for them to test out :)

gerry yaum
14-Jun-2017, 21:23
You might want to contact Kurt Moser. He does a lot of ULF wetplate work in the Dolomites and has just completed building a camera of a similar size to the one you describe. He has the Apo-Nikkor 1780mm f14 to do the job.
http://www.lightcatcher.it/en/

For a different look, I certainly would not sneeze at the Wollaston Meniscus lenses that Reinhold Schable is making. Currently his largest ULF lens is 790mm f5.6 and has lots of coverage -- he might be induced to work with you to produce a larger lens to meet your needs. http://re-inventedphotoequip.com/ULF%20Lens.html

Thanks very much for the links MATT...I will check them out and try to contact Kurt. Thanks also for the suggestion about Wollaston Meniscus Lens...you guys here at Largeformatphotography have been a great help.

Gerry

bob carnie
15-Jun-2017, 06:23
Angus...Will be doing this in Canada, most of you guys are in the States I believe, not sure I will be going down there. Might be hard to explain the darkroom truck filled with semi toxic chemistry to the very suspicious border guards. I do like the idea of visiting Canadian Large Format people. Can take the camera around for them to test out :)

Hi Gerry

I can put you in touch with the Gallery 44 people who would be extremely interested to meet you and see what you are up too, and of course your welcome to set it up here at my gallery for a day to show people. Yes I would not recommend hitting the border with that truck these days...

sounds exciting project... talking about exciting projects I have not heard one word about the young guy walking in silence any one know how he is doing?

Bob

gerry yaum
15-Jun-2017, 22:28
My suggested outline of procedure was based on the information you had given in this thread about getting the camera made. When you get the lens flange made at Grimes, it would be a idea to it made oversize (that is, a square plate), so the retaining screws are quite some distance away from the hole in the lens board/Front standard panel so you can use alternative lenses on the same wooden panel.

I still feel the extreme difficulties of transporting, preparing and using 35x35" glass plates is a good way to end up with very little surplus energy for the "artistic" side of photography.

No doubt but that you have purchased an excellent tessar and at F14 you can get a viewable image. In spite of the mentioned problems of coverage at landscape. distances, it may be OK at small apertures.

Thanks Steven, no offence taken, your advice is appreciated.
Gerry

gerry yaum
15-Jun-2017, 22:28
Hi Gerry

I can put you in touch with the Gallery 44 people who would be extremely interested to meet you and see what you are up too, and of course your welcome to set it up here at my gallery for a day to show people. Yes I would not recommend hitting the border with that truck these days...

sounds exciting project... talking about exciting projects I have not heard one word about the young guy walking in silence any one know how he is doing?

Bob

BOB...thanks for that. I would love to meet them (Gallery 44 folks)! They have rejected previous work of mine on numerous submissions (sex worker, families of the dump). :) I am sure they are good folk thou. When I am in Toronto (GALLERY 44 is in Toronto right?), I would be glad to meet some of them, speak about the 35x35 ambro project, show the camera/lens and of course would like to view the photos on display at the gallery.

Thanks also for the invitation to your gallery Bob. I love talking and showing everything photography. A real highlight for me is telling stories, sharing memories, encouraging creativity, love all of that. I did a series of photographs called "My Fathers Last Days" in 2014-15 and am doing an artist talk for that at a local gallery on August 31, REALLY LOOKING FOWARD TO IT! It will be like bringing my dad back to life, reliving all our times together that last year.

For you out there interested here is the latest look at the camera I will be using for the "Oh! Canada!!" project, the HF3535, it is being built for me in the Czech Republic. Love how tiny the 35mm and or DSLR camera looks in the one photo.

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.ca/2017/06/hf3535-camera-build-photos-photos-update_15.html

gerry yaum
16-Jun-2017, 02:18
Re: Process lenses' coverage...

Those are different. Celor type ones do not improve in their edge sharpness when stopped down. Tessar type lenses are much better as "poor man's wideangles". The more sophisticated 6-elements lenses are often sharp up to the edges of their illuminated field, regardless of the tight field restrictions stated in the manufacturer's publications (which are relevant for high-end process work such as mapping).

My own first-hand experience with Rodenstock Apo-Ronar CL 1200mm f/16, 6/6 version, and CZJ Apo-Germinar 1000mm f/12 showed both covered exactly the same field of about 126 cm (~50") at infinity with no vignetting at f/32. At wider stops, edge sharpness was also OK but there was a lot of light fall-off.

(The Germinar was smaller and lighter in weight though and more manageable in the field giving me more spare angle coverage for tilts.)

Gosh this lens stuff is complicated, I will have to read this over 2 or 3 times..or 5 or 6! Hopefully the one lens I bought will work for me, I am more interested in just telling stories with my pictures and trying to elicit emotions from the viewers of the photos....Thanks for your help Gerry

gerry yaum
16-Jun-2017, 02:20
Exciting. Can't wait to see the results. Why don't you drive around the country to LFPF members? You'll probably get many willing assistants to help you with your picture taking. I might even bring out my mini-camera for comparison sake (only 14x17").

Sounds great Angus!!

gerry yaum
16-Jun-2017, 02:21
You might want to contact Kurt Moser. He does a lot of ULF wetplate work in the Dolomites and has just completed building a camera of a similar size to the one you describe. He has the Apo-Nikkor 1780mm f14 to do the job.
http://www.lightcatcher.it/en/

For a different look, I certainly would not sneeze at the Wollaston Meniscus lenses that Reinhold Schable is making. Currently his largest ULF lens is 790mm f5.6 and has lots of coverage -- he might be induced to work with you to produce a larger lens to meet your needs. http://re-inventedphotoequip.com/ULF%20Lens.html

I tried contacting Kurt, Thanks again Matt.

gerry yaum
16-Jun-2017, 03:50
[QUOTE=goamules;1394680]It looks like you are a serious photographer, and do some intensive work. I commend you on not being dissuaded by anything anyone has said here. I was not trying to stop your goal, I was just recommending you buy the lens first, and then decide what size it will cover and what plate size you can use. Which looks like what you are about to do, if Dan is right, the lens you jumped on for $7,300 won't cover the 35X35" you wanted.

I think why we were responding so cautiously is that someone asks about making "the BIGGEST" wetplates every year. Many have great intentions, though some just want to make "the biggest" and win some unstated competition. Almost all of them want to make Mammoth plates, but have no money. So they usually are asking how they can do this, cheap. Often wanting to spend less on a lens than they will for the silver nitrate to make the bath.

If you had said money is no object, that you were willing to spend anything to get it done, then most of us would have said "of course you can do this." Not many people will buy a $7,000 lens without knowing if it will A) cover, B) be fast enough, C) fit on a lensboard, or D) have a camera with enough bellows. But money can fix all kinds of bothersome problems.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goamules...Thanks for your thoughts. Not really about making the biggest, not a size thing, but the idea of creating across Canada, doing a big work (2nd biggest country in the world) appeals to me, especially in lanscape (also getting a 26x35 back for the caamera). That somehow seems right. As to the biggest wet plates, that belongs to the truck camera people, Ian Ruhter or Kurt Moser (when he gets his completed). Not Gerry Yaum, I am just a security guard from Edmonton who tries his best. Only make photos becuase I have to, it brings complete personal joy to me.

From what I was told by many and from what the auction site says, the Lens will easily do the job I want it for. If it does not cover in all situations so what, that is part of the appeal of using vintage glass with vintage processes like wet plate (Kenro Izu's work half the time has vignetted corners). I try not to get to hooked on the technical crap and instead try to concentrate on the emotional impact of the work created. It is all about the photos after all, that is all that matters, nothing else does. How does the work make you FEEL!!??

As to money, I do not drink, do not smoke, do not do drugs, do not gamble, have no children etc. My money all goes into my photography. I have some assets that I can sell to pay for this project if it goes 10 years. No use having money if I am dead, but creating some important art work before I die, now that is an exciting possiblity. Like I said before, this will be hard, but compared to learning another language, dealing with sex tourist drunks (SEX WORKER) or making photos 1/2 way cross the world in garbage dump while standing in filth covered in flies (FAMILIES OF THE DUMP), or of your dying father (MY FATHERS LAST DAYS) etc, this should be relatively easy. Mastering a process (wet plate), working very hard to make the pics, being devoted to it etc. It should go well. As long as I continue to love the work created then things will work out. If I lose my desire for the photos made then everything will collapse. I think this is going to be great fun! Even thou I am going to Thai for 6 months soon, I am thinking about his project far off in the future more.

Not many people will buy a $7,000 lens without knowing if it will A) cover, B) be fast enough, C) fit on a lensboard, or D) have a camera with enough bellows. But money can fix all kinds of bothersome problems. [/B

A) it will cover I believe, as many sources tell me so, 4 or 5 sources.
B) it is fast enough for landscapes (I have a 16x20 Chamonix with 3 lens to do portrait work with also, might buy a Petzval lens for that camera also) or I might figure a way to do portraits with the HF3535. I now own 3 lens that cover the 16x20 camera, including this beauty.

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.ca/2016/07/bought-me-600mm-fujinon-f115-lens.html

C) it will fit the lens, the camera maker says so. We designed a camera with a larger lensboard area for this very purpose.
D) the camera should have enough bellows for my needs. I am also consulting with the camera maker about building a secondary bellows that I can attach in certain shooting situations (wonder what that bellows factor will be!).

[B]But money can fix all kinds of bothersome problems.

I have limited funds but I throw what I have into what I think is important. I try to use the money wisely. I also try to help those in my photographs. The $500 in gallery money (artist and shipping fee) I earned for a recent show I will donate back to the faimlies in the garbage dump where I am making pics. Also got donations from several people who saw the exhibition (total donation now is $1370, hoping for $1500 before I leave Canada) Money is great for those kind or problems, I totally agree! I try not to waste money.

I must remind you that you seem to again be looking at, a glass 1/2 full. That will not lead to successful projects or dreams..you will find excuses of why NOT to do it, the bellows, the lens coverage, the clouds in the sky, your age, your health, your money, the colour of the cat that crossed your path, WHATEVER!!...all of that to me is useless crap.

The way I operate, or at least try to, is:

Think, find a dream, learn-study your project (for example I am now studying about Canadian history and aborginal culture for "Oh! Canada!!"), do your best to get what works technically then adapt and create!! Create until you drop!...

Best to stop the negative Nelly thinking and make pictures instead. I photographed this child in the garbage dump in Thailand in 2015, she has a bleak future, her life opportunities are so limited.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-89p5nSCyQ4Q/VqT6ATBcHgI/AAAAAAAAXT0/0iOiX7CaOtE/s1600/SAM_2383a.jpg

What are my problems compared to what she will face in her future? What do I have to worry about? Whether my lens has enough coverage? Who freaking cares, it will work, if it does not I will figure a way round that!

Thanks for your thoughts again.

Gerry
www.gerryyaum.blogspot.com

gerry yaum
16-Jun-2017, 03:52
165517165518165519165521Well 35 x 35 is out of my league to be sure so I'll defer to those who have already chimed in as Dan and others have consistently been excellent sources of information on the technical aspects and capabilities of various lenses. I don't think we are appreciative enough of their expertise and what valuable resources they have become for our community here. I tend to have far fewer post as I usually only contribute to my immediate level of experience. I shoot 20 x 24 Ambrotypes and film negatives for Pt/Pd and have various lenses that fit those needs. The suggestion I have since this is a five year out/retirement project is to start to envision the project through the available syntax of the gear instead of trying to find the gear for the syntax of your vision. So for example for life size portrait headshot you could be using a 355 G-Claron on my 20 x 24 and even get bigger than life size head shots, which of course also reduces your bellows extension necessary for such portraiture. For my portraiture on the 20 x 24 I use a 22 inch 550 Schneider Fine Art Lens, which allows for beautiful portraits all the way from full body to bigger than life size shoulder/head shots. It is also a fantastically sharp semi-wide landscape lens in that format. For a tighter look in landscapes I use 1000 mm Germinar (sp?) that is very sharp. For my wet plate work in that format I use a 30 inch Dallmeyer RR, and a 37 inch Dallmeyer 8D which took me 5 years to find. Since you are having the camera made have inserts made for your wet plate holders that will take smaller plates that fit the various lens capabilities and then fit it to our vision as you traverse the Canadian countryside. If you are shooting film too then have a reducing back made for 20 x 24 then buy Ilford film in their annual run and you can shoot film too. I had both a 20 x 24 back and 16 x 20 back made for my Ebony and I don't regret it all as both get used frequently. You have an incredible vision in front of you don't have it limited by gear. Let the gear be there in all its mulititude to give you choices at each stop.

Here are a few shots with the above mentioned lenses as well as a picture of my daughter holding the 8D


What a truly beautiful image, thanks so much. NOW THAT IS INSPIRING!!

gerry yaum
17-Jun-2017, 00:32
My suggested outline of procedure was based on the information you had given in this thread about getting the camera made. When you get the lens flange made at Grimes, it would be a idea to it made oversize (that is, a square plate), so the retaining screws are quite some distance away from the hole in the lens board/Front standard panel so you can use alternative lenses on the same wooden panel.

I still feel the extreme difficulties of transporting, preparing and using 35x35" glass plates is a good way to end up with very little surplus energy for the "artistic" side of photography.

No doubt but that you have purchased an excellent tessar and at F14 you can get a viewable image. In spite of the mentioned problems of coverage at landscape. distances, it may be OK at small apertures.

Thanks Steven...Just read the last part of your messange. Not all my shots are going to be at 35x35, plan on getting a reducing back, possibly 26x35 or maybe even smaller at lets say 22x32 something like that. Lots of options. I could also get a second or 3rd lens with varying coverage. Remember this is all 4+ years in my future, lots of time to work out the bugs. No worries here!

As to not having enough artistic energy, try carrying a 5x7 and holders, 2 lens etc around a garbage dump for 7 or 8 hours in the blazing hot sun. Then try making pictures. If I can do that, I think I can manage coating a 35x35 glass plate with collodion etc and carrying that back and forth from my camera.

It is all a matter of desire. If the pics are turning out, if the pics excite, then I will work my ass off to get it done, no problems. The problems start if things are going badly, then some laziness might ensue!

gerry yaum
17-Jun-2017, 00:43
Well 35 x 35 is out of my league to be sure so I'll defer to those who have already chimed in as Dan and others have consistently been excellent sources of information on the technical aspects and capabilities of various lenses. I don't think we are appreciative enough of their expertise and what valuable resources they have become for our community here. I tend to have far fewer post as I usually only contribute to my immediate level of experience. I shoot 20 x 24 Ambrotypes and film negatives for Pt/Pd and have various lenses that fit those needs. The suggestion I have since this is a five year out/retirement project is to start to envision the project through the available syntax of the gear instead of trying to find the gear for the syntax of your vision. So for example for life size portrait headshot you could be using a 355 G-Claron on my 20 x 24 and even get bigger than life size head shots, which of course also reduces your bellows extension necessary for such portraiture. For my portraiture on the 20 x 24 I use a 22 inch 550 Schneider Fine Art Lens, which allows for beautiful portraits all the way from full body to bigger than life size shoulder/head shots. It is also a fantastically sharp semi-wide landscape lens in that format. For a tighter look in landscapes I use 1000 mm Germinar (sp?) that is very sharp. For my wet plate work in that format I use a 30 inch Dallmeyer RR, and a 37 inch Dallmeyer 8D which took me 5 years to find. Since you are having the camera made have inserts made for your wet plate holders that will take smaller plates that fit the various lens capabilities and then fit it to our vision as you traverse the Canadian countryside. If you are shooting film too then have a reducing back made for 20 x 24 then buy Ilford film in their annual run and you can shoot film too. I had both a 20 x 24 back and 16 x 20 back made for my Ebony and I don't regret it all as both get used frequently. You have an incredible vision in front of you don't have it limited by gear. Let the gear be there in all its mulititude to give you choices at each stop.

Here are a few shots with the above mentioned lenses as well as a picture of my daughter holding the 8D

Thanks for all the suggestions MONTY....I think thou people invest too much time in the tech part of things (especially in the forum world) and not enough time creating and trying to find a unique artistic vision. The power of the final work is all that should really matter. How you achieve that work, what tools you use is of minor importance in the end. As long as the gear basically works, the rest is up to the artist. It is a bit like asking what typewriter Hemmingway used to write "The Old Man And the Sea". Does sit really matter? The final work matters, the tools, not so much. Hemmingway also did not need to know how to build a typewriter, that was of no importance to his creative efforts.

I appreciate your thoughts and suggestions of course, you have much more experience at this than I do. Thanks for helping. I do the annual run HP5 for my 16x20, doing it this new camera and a 20x24 reducing back might be an option. I am thinking thou of doing large glass plate negs instead 35x35, 26x35, and smaller, then contact printing them as I would with traditional film.

gerry yaum
17-Jun-2017, 00:53
Re: Process lenses' coverage...

Those are different. Celor type ones do not improve in their edge sharpness when stopped down. Tessar type lenses are much better as "poor man's wideangles". The more sophisticated 6-elements lenses are often sharp up to the edges of their illuminated field, regardless of the tight field restrictions stated in the manufacturer's publications (which are relevant for high-end process work such as mapping).

My own first-hand experience with Rodenstock Apo-Ronar CL 1200mm f/16, 6/6 version, and CZJ Apo-Germinar 1000mm f/12 showed both covered exactly the same field of about 126 cm (~50") at infinity with no vignetting at f/32. At wider stops, edge sharpness was also OK but there was a lot of light fall-off.

(The Germinar was smaller and lighter in weight though and more manageable in the field giving me more spare angle coverage for tilts.)

Thanks Ridax, another 2nd lens option.

bob carnie
17-Jun-2017, 06:28
What a truly beautiful image, thanks so much. NOW THAT IS INSPIRING!!

Monty does the best plates I have seen Gerry , and he is a somewhat nice guy to boot.. I am sure he could be a bit of a mentor when you get going. Too bad he is not Canadian.

bob carnie
17-Jun-2017, 06:30
For all you wet plate and large camera knobs out there, Ilford is doing limited runs of Ortho 25 in large rolls, I just bought a bunch , any interest contact me, I am buying 20 inch rolls to use, but 40 inch is available which obviously could be cut down to any size depending on skill sets.

gerry yaum
19-Jun-2017, 13:17
You might want to contact Kurt Moser. He does a lot of ULF wetplate work in the Dolomites and has just completed building a camera of a similar size to the one you describe. He has the Apo-Nikkor 1780mm f14 to do the job.
http://www.lightcatcher.it/en/

For a different look, I certainly would not sneeze at the Wollaston Meniscus lenses that Reinhold Schable is making. Currently his largest ULF lens is 790mm f5.6 and has lots of coverage -- he might be induced to work with you to produce a larger lens to meet your needs. http://re-inventedphotoequip.com/ULF%20Lens.html

Matt ...Thanks so much for telling me about Kurt and his wonderful work. I sent him and email and he was extremely friendly and generous in his reply (might have a new friend there!). Kurt gave me all his lens info and even asked me to visit him so we could work together. A great fellow with a sharing creative-teaching heart. You got to love that. With Kurt's permission I posted his lens tech stuff on his blog, others here might find it of interest. Here is the link.

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.ca/2017/06/email-kurt-moser-great-wet-plate.html

gerry yaum
21-Oct-2017, 00:46
Thought I would update you all. My 35x35 camera is currently being built. I will receive on my return from Thailand to Canada in about April-May 2018. Here are some photos of the current build state.

https://gerryyaum.blogspot.com/2017/10/while-i-am-in-thailand-build-of.html

Soomuu
21-Oct-2017, 11:04
Wow, camera is looking good Gerry! What size of lens board does it take?