Is large format photography on the rise?

[Vick Ko]

Is large format photography on the rise?

I am intrigued because a dealer friend of mine is saying that he is getting more requests for modern 4x5 cameras.

And my current observations are that LF lenses aren't getting cheaper.

...Vick

[Steven Tribe]

As they say:

"The Jury is still out on this."

Lots of new people, but time will tell if they can overcome the usual setbacks and have the available time to make the progress that makes for continued interest.

As far as pricing of LF lenses -

Standard (ex Studio and prof. photographer's) modern lenses with shutters have been quite stable in the 4 years I have been looking. Availability is falling as the Generation change has been completed.

Standard antique lenses like Dagor and Protar have been falling slightly in this same period.

Pictorial lenses and Petzvals for the larger formats have risen a lot - but appear to have reached their maximum about 18 months ago. Demand for the more special/rare/huge/unique lenses is very unpredictable!

Lenses that were unsaleable a few years ago (projection lenses) now acheive prices which approach that of the "real" article.

This is just my personal impression, CCHarrison's website has data for a few years as regards Pictorial lenses.

[vinny]

You'll also notice that many of the newbie questions here asking about 4x5 are directly related to huge prints. Galleries want bigger and bigger prints and people think it'll be so easy to do it "if i just get a large format camera"

[Kirk Gittings]

Participation is a bit down here from a high point about 2 years ago. Allot of the sales here of "kits" look to me about people getting out of LF. Who knows for sure?

[Eric Biggerstaff]

I know of one well known US camera maker who says he cannot make cameras fast enough, and the sizes 5X7 on up are the ones being sold the most. Also, a VP at a large retailer told me he has been having a tough time keeping enlargers in stock as many schools and individuals are once again doing darkroom work. So, perhaps there is a bit of a move back to historic processes and film. Only time will tell.

[BrianShaw]

Allot of the sales here of "kits" look to me about people getting out of LF. Who knows for sure?

As you say, who knows for sure. I suspect that youare right about the sellers, but the buyers are likely to be users. I can't imagine someone buying all this stuff just to hoarde and store in a closet. But for me, I am shooting much less LF than ever before... for a variety of reasons.

[Kirk Gittings]

You are right of course-there is allot of buying activity by newbies it appears also.

For me it is on a project by project basis with most b&w projects being 100% large format and all color being digital, but overall a ton less since going digital for my commercial work.

[DennisD]

Let's hope it's on the "rise"

and not on the "fall",

clearly there's been a "shift",

so best to "swing" with it

until there's a "tilt" !

---------------------------------------

I'm really sorry about this, but I couldn't resist ...
just be glad I didn't try to make it rhyme or put in the part about "dropping the bed" !

[sully75]

Nobody is giving stuff away on here, that's for sure. I've only been in this for a couple of years, but seems to me that prices have risen a little bit for basic stuff and there are not too many insane bargains.

[mandoman7]

As you say, who knows for sure.... but the buyers are likely to be users. I can't imagine someone buying all this stuff just to hoarde and store in a closet.
I don't think they buy to hoard, but they may not have really grappled with what the challenge really represents. With modern expressive arts, it seems to be more about attitude and image than learning about difficult procedures through trial and error. Youngsters may like the idea of appearing to be artisans, but many stall when they get to the learning-the-craft part. They apparently thought that they could "just do it".

[BrianShaw]

Youngsters may like the idea of appearing to be artisans, but many stall when they get to the learning-the-craft part. They apparently thought that they could "just do it".

Yes... I don't know if the numbers are rising or if I'm just noticing it more, but there are many postings on the photo forums by "newbies" who are trying out film and larger-format cameras. So seem to think it through then buy and use, but there are others who seem to be in a swirl of buy-try-sell (repeat) and may not be achieving their goals of becoming an instant artisan... or even learning the craft.

Then there are others, like me, who keep plugging along with the gear we've had for decades in the hopes of someday becoming relatively proficient and maybe even creating a decent image every once in a while.

[E. von Hoegh]

You'll also notice that many of the newbie questions here asking about 4x5 are directly related to huge prints. Galleries want bigger and bigger prints and people think it'll be so easy to do it "if i just get a large format camera"

I've noticed that too. *snickers*

[Mark Stahlke]

With modern expressive arts, it seems to be more about attitude and image than learning about difficult procedures through trial and error. Youngsters may like the idea of appearing to be artisans, but many stall when they get to the learning-the-craft part. They apparently thought that they could "just do it".Sounds just like the amusing Hiptsers Stunned thread. (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?93864-Hiptsers-stunned)

[mandoman7]

Thanks Mark, that article says it way better.

[DennisD]

You'll also notice that many of the newbie questions here asking about 4x5 are directly related to huge prints. Galleries want bigger and bigger prints and people think it'll be so easy to do it "if i just get a large format camera"

As noted above... A symptom of the inkjet generation and the (readily available) capability we have to make giant size prints (whether graphic or photographic).

"Larger is better" and "size does matter" in the retail, advertising, and gallery worlds. Walk into any copy center or office supply store (Staples, etc.) and there's a wide format HP printer for your photos, posters, whatever. We are barraged with large, poster size images from the subway platform to the shopping mall.

Much art was always on a large canvas, now photo images enjoy a much easier access to large size printing thru the digital process. ( I don't, for a moment, doubt that Ansel Adams would have loved to dabble in digital printing, if not routinely making his larger prints via inkjet, given the quality achieved to date).

So there's a likely correlation between "huge prints" and interest in LF cameras, however direct or indirect (or right or wrong- perhaps not fair to judge).

[John Kasaian]

Well, Yosemite Valley is the Disneyland equivalent for LF photographers, and driving around I haven't seen any more numbers of view cameras being set up, but then I haven't seen any less either. FWIW.

[John Kasaian]

Thanks Mark, that article says it way better.

The deal I find with large negatives and large prints is that imperfections are also larger.

[Frank Petronio]

I bet half the outfits sold never get used and the rest just a little. These people buying $5000 Ebonies as their first cameras are just acquiring nice possessions... they get stumped at handling film. One guy told me he will only use expensive, old Quickloads because film holders are too intimidating.

[Mark Stahlke]

... they get stumped at handling film. One guy told me he will only use expensive, old Quickloads because film holders are too intimidating.When I got started with LF I used Quickloads exclusively. I figured I had enough to learn without learning to load film holders too. Once I got the hang of using the camera, I started loading my own film holders and found it to be very easy.

[John Olsen]

78837Our waste transfer station had a 4x5 enlarger, including lens, on the freebie pallet a few weeks ago. Evidently at least one person couldn't find even a photographer who would haul it away from his house. I also snatched up a couple of free mixing valve assemblies locally. I don't detect a ground-swell of LF interest on our island.
I attach results of last weekend's shoot, not that it's relevant in any way.
John Olsen

[Chris Wong]

My only exposure to other large format photographers is this forum and I don't know anybody personally who uses a large format camera in my circle of friends. I don't feel like it is on the rise and I base that on watching the buy/sell ads on this forum. The large format stuff isn't moving as fast as it used to and sellers seem to be getting rid of their whole outfit meaning to me that they are getting out of large format. Just my observation for the last 1/2 year or so. Again, my opinion is only based on watching the buy/sell ads.

[Kuzano]

UP... but where?

I've been selling film photography gear for about 8 years on eBay. Mixed merchandise, but good equipment and particularly Large Format gear has been selling fast.. usually on the first post, and prices are up. That's an answer from my own personal experience.

However, most of the large format gear is going over big waters. In fact, my four last sizeable sales have been for good prices and have gone to Federation of Russia. Many asian country purchases... Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand and so on. Most of these sales have been Large Format. I've attempted to restrict International sale, but when they ask and feedback is good.... I relent. These people are paying my prices... not auction prices. I also get that most of these people are going to use the gear.

Yes...up. Even good known well maintained Medium Format, and quality 35mm merchandises are moving well for me at profitable prices. 35mm lenses that were popular with film and qualify as "legacy" Manual Focus lenses for mirrorless digital are HOT merchandise. Rising prices there. You can almost throw away the bodies to make the entire deal about the lens, and reduce shipping. I generally put a working but not so attractive lens on the 35mm bodies and donate them to the local Community College film classes, which are FULL running twice every quarter. WIN, WIN, WIN, WIN!!!

[Andrew O'Neill]

Let's hope it's on the "rise"

and not on the "fall",

clearly there's been a "shift",

so best to "swing" with it

until there's a "tilt" !


:)

[genotypewriter]

Is large format photography on the rise?

I am intrigued because a dealer friend of mine is saying that he is getting more requests for modern 4x5 cameras.

And my current observations are that LF lenses aren't getting cheaper.

...Vick

I asked the same question in a different way:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/largeformat/discuss/72157630037748627/

[Kodachrome25]

Wow, lot of unfounded good ol boy attitude towards "newbies" in this thread, way to go guys....

[Sylvester Graham]

I think it's good if more people are considering slowing down their process, even if it means going Lf. That being said I wonder what percent of all photographers shoot Lf gear. 1%? I'm thinking more like a tenth of one percent. With such small numbers it doesn't take a whole lot of new LF shooters to increase demand to the point where it overwhelms the few dealers who sell LF gear.

[Sylvester Graham]

Wow, lot of unfounded good ol boy attitude towards "newbies" in this thread, way to go guys....

+1.

[Bill_1856]

There's more shooting, less darkroom. Digital printing has taken a lot of the drudgery out of large format. I expect that the loss of Polaroid probably nearly delt it a body blow.

[tgtaylor]

Not on this site where large format photography is on the decline. For example, a forum moderator, supported by other members, recently asserted that camera phones are practically equivalent to the view camera and other long standing members routinely bash traditional photographic methods as inferior. Even the forum's founder, QT Luong, has admitted that he no longer shoots film which he considers inferior to digital capture. Consider the post above where large format photography is described as “drudgery.”

Thomas

[RichardSperry]

As noted above... A symptom of the inkjet generation and the (readily available) capability we have to make giant size prints (whether graphic or photographic).

After visiting four photography exhibitions today, two at the de Young and two at SFMoMA; I would say the trend for large mural sized prints apparently started on the 80s.

And they were all chromogenic prints, not inkjet. Notably Cindy Sherman and Andreas Gursky. And the 2000's stuff is absolutely huge. While not represented in the exhibits I saw today, Spencer Tunick prints large to huge as well. With Sherman and Tunick shooting MF and Gursky shooting 4x5.

I doubt that galleries are buying these very large prints, I am sure they are selling them. That is to say that buyers are buying very large prints.

[RichardSperry]

Wow, lot of unfounded good ol boy attitude towards "newbies" in this thread, way to go guys....

I believe the relevant phrase is, "eating their young".

The examples here in this thread are timid in comparison to some of the insults, name-calling, and condescension doled out by the aged LF old timers here to newcomers and LF beginners. Just insult them back, they back off then; if you roll over and puppy dog they continue.

[genotypewriter]

Just insult them back, they back off then; if you roll over and puppy dog they continue.

No. Participation will just get you banned when the mods wake up. It's a shame how just because someone memorised a dusty old lens catalogue they think of themselves as superior to others who might actually be good photographers, if that means anything to anyone. At the same time, as unfortunate as it may sound, it's all that some of these aggressive old-timers are left with... just their memories.

[BrianShaw]

+1.

-1

[BrianShaw]

No. Participation will just get you banned when the mods wake up. It's a shame how just because someone memorised a dusty old lens catalogue they think of themselves as superior to others who might actually be good photographers, if that means anything to anyone. At the same time, as unfortunate as it may sound, it's all that some of these aggressive old-timers are left with... just their memories.

+1

[Bill_1856]

Consider the post above where large format photography is described as “drudgery.”
Thomas

You are misquoting (or misinterpreting) me.
It is the darkroom part of film photography, whether Minox or LF, that is druggery for most of us. Not the hauling of 50 pounds of camera, tripod, film, holders, lenses, filters, sunshades, darkcloth, changing bag. meter, gray card, boxes, and bags. Now -- what have I forgotton? I always forget something -- oh yeah, the loupe. Now, what else...?

[Kodachrome25]

You are misquoting (or misinterpreting) me.
It is the darkroom part of film photography, whether Minox or LF, that is druggery for most of us.

Who is "most of us", it is because of my darkroom and clients paying for larger real photographic prints that I got into LF in the first place. No darkroom, no interest. I am not into shooting film only to make a computer generated print.

[Brian Ellis]

Who is "most of us", it is because of my darkroom and clients paying for larger real photographic prints that I got into LF in the first place. No darkroom, no interest. I am not into shooting film only to make a computer generated print.

Computers can generate prints? Maybe some people have computers that do that but mine never has. Every morning I wake up and the first thing I do is look in the printer to see if the computer generated a print while I was asleep. And the damn thing never has. It just sits there resting, doing nothing, leaving it up to me to do all the work.

[Kodachrome25]

Computers can generate prints? Maybe some people have computers that do that but mine never has. Every morning I wake up and the first thing I do is look in the printer to see if the computer generated a print while I was asleep. And the damn thing never has. It just sits there resting, doing nothing, leaving it up to me to do all the work.

Lol, you know I mean...:-)
Seriously though, after shooting probably close to one million pictures on digital cameras for the past 20 years, I just don't want a computer or digital anything around my fine art and neither do a number of the 20-something's I know who shoot film. I have a thousand sheets of 4x5 film and 400 sheets of Ilford paper from B&H showing up at my door today, that is my future, not same as the masses digital. A good example of what young people are doing by Bob Carnie, last paragraph:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?93847-Where-to-purchase-large-paper-to-print-on&p=921430&viewfull=1#post921430

[jp]

I've been into photography and darkroom work since the '80s but only LF in the past couple years because the Internet and the digital exodus has made it affordable. There's still lots of LF people dying too unfortunately which keeps the market flush. I bought a camera from Per Volquartz who was selling it for a dying friend. Next thing I know, he's gone too. I've been buying photo equipment from the dead and dying since the '80s.

I think a lot of the resale happening is people getting a heavy complicated setup and deciding they want something more specific, or in a worst case, the cheap heavy gear is too much effort for moderate results. Many people have no darkroom either... Instant film variety would be great (think new55) for such people.

I think the lightweight and simple LF ways to do things aren't well represented here. I carry no more than 20 pounds; a speed graphic, tiltall, two cheap lenses, a few film holders, plastic incident meter. It's not my only LF camera, but I use it the most. Other people are thrilled with big quality pinhole negatives (or paper) that you can only get with LF. Many people come here looking for a do-everything setup and end up with something that's too heavy or complicated, but it does everything.... I've got a cheap heavy monorail camera that doesn't get used, but by golly it meets the needs on everyone's wishlist. and I've got 8x10's that don't get out as much as they should. We exalt people like David Burnett for using a relatively simple LF camera in the contemporary press, but rarely recommend it here because it doesnt meet everyone's spec list for movements, extension, bling, etc...

[BrianShaw]

We exalt people like David Burnett for using a relatively simple LF camera in the contemporary press, but rarely recommend it here because it doesnt meet everyone's spec list for movements, extension, bling, etc...

Excellent observation.

[Jody_S]

Computers can generate prints? Maybe some people have computers that do that but mine never has. Every morning I wake up and the first thing I do is look in the printer to see if the computer generated a print while I was asleep. And the damn thing never has. It just sits there resting, doing nothing, leaving it up to me to do all the work.

It is NOT sitting there doing nothing. It's gathering up your personal and financial info and sending it off to scammers in various countries, but most often Russia. It could also be scouring through your photos and reporting on content to the US government's 'Homeland Security'.

[Brian C. Miller]

Computers can generate prints? Maybe some people have computers that do that but mine never has.

Mine does. All I have to do is turn it on, touch the right keys in the right sequence, and off it goes of its own accord.
"It's easy to play any musical instrument: all you have to do is touch the right key at the right time and the instrument will play itself."
-- Johannes Sebastian Bach

Stopping the thing when it makes a mistake is another matter...
;)

As for the thread topic, it's hard to say that interest in LF is increasing or decreasing. What I have seen for myself is that people want something to play with besides their digital camera, but there are some hard facts that I see. For instance, 8x10 Kodak film is now only special order. Fujifilm isn't making 4x5 instant film. Quickload/Readyload packs are long gone from the retail channel.
On the up side, there is the Ilford/Harman Titan pinhole camera. There are ancedotal reports of an increase of LF sales.
But without real data, everything is just a guess.

[jnantz]

on the rise, or fall ?
not sure but "collectors" and people looking
for a special "look" are grabbing up lenses
that were inexpensive few years ago
so they are now worth a small fortune.

i look forward to more newbies and hipsters...
its the newbies and hipsters that make the world go round ..

[thefurman]

I believe the relevant phrase is, "eating their young".

The examples here in this thread are timid in comparison to some of the insults, name-calling, and condescension doled out by the aged LF old timers here to newcomers and LF beginners. Just insult them back, they back off then; if you roll over and puppy dog they continue.
Really?

I'm a typical newb. Having just wandered into large format photography recently after making an impulse purchase of an old speed graphic I've been absolutely amazed at how well I was received by the community. All in all, this place has been surprisingly welcoming, not to mention full of useful info. I've been around for a couple of weeks, posted some photos for critique (and got a great response) and have yet to be insulted by any of the good old boys. What am I doing wrong?

[BrianShaw]

What am I doing wrong?

Well, have you started a thread asking, "which lense is best?" That will give them two things to rip you apart about. Then start a thread asking, "If film is better than digital, then why is film dying?" If you survive that... you can rest easy!

p.s. Welcome to the forum!

[thefurman]

I knew I was missing something.
Oh, and thanks!

[RichardSperry]

What am I doing wrong?



Join Date
Aug 2012
Posts 7

[Kodachrome25]

Well, me neither, the slams I was referring to are in this thread that are indirectly to new comers in other threads, they are pretty much self explanatory.


Really?

I'm a typical newb. Having just wandered into large format photography recently after making an impulse purchase of an old speed graphic I've been absolutely amazed at how well I was received by the community. All in all, this place has been surprisingly welcoming, not to mention full of useful info. I've been around for a couple of weeks, posted some photos for critique (and got a great response) and have yet to be insulted by any of the good old boys. What am I doing wrong?

[E. von Hoegh]

Really?

I'm a typical newb. Having just wandered into large format photography recently after making an impulse purchase of an old speed graphic I've been absolutely amazed at how well I was received by the community. All in all, this place has been surprisingly welcoming, not to mention full of useful info. I've been around for a couple of weeks, posted some photos for critique (and got a great response) and have yet to be insulted by any of the good old boys. What am I doing wrong?

You're not being a clueless, confrontational j@ck@$$.

E "good ol' boy" von Hoegh. (winking smiley)

[BrianShaw]

touche'

[E. von Hoegh]

It wouldn't let me post " @#!*% ". See? @##&%*$##@@~~)&*^%%!!.

Welcome, Furman!

[Frank Petronio]

The old farts should shoot half as well as Mr. Fur.

I don't know who has been mean to any newbs here? Most people are very encouraging and patient, beyond the call of duty when 99% of the questions could be answered ad-nauseam with a simple visit to a search engine or by reading the elaborate articles that grace the frontside of this forum.

If anything I've met a few newbies that are pestering and demanding, yet too stubborn to consider thoughtful, personal advice. Or they are suddenly quite expert at some aspect in spite of the fact that they haven't actually shot anything yet. And I see them a few months later selling off their stupidly-made purchases. Good riddance. We need all the film users we can muster but life is too short to deal with the ungrateful and dumb.

[E. von Hoegh]

The old farts should shoot half as well as Mr. Fur.

I don't know who has been mean to any newbs here? Most people are very encouraging and patient, beyond the call of duty when 99% of the questions could be answered ad-nauseam with a simple visit to a search engine or by reading the elaborate articles that grace the frontside of this forum.

If anything I've met a few newbies that are pestering and demanding, yet too stubborn to consider thoughtful, personal advice. Or they are suddenly quite expert at some aspect in spite of the fact that they haven't actually shot anything yet. And I see them a few months later selling off their stupidly-made purchases. Good riddance. We need all the film users we can muster but life is too short to deal with the ungrateful and dumb.

Hear, hear!

[Andrew O'Neill]

It is the darkroom part of film photography, whether Minox or LF, that is druggery for most of us


How can the most important part of the process be considered drudgery?

[BrianShaw]

Hear, hear!

I heard that!

[Andrew O'Neill]

Well, have you started a thread asking, "which lense is best?" That will give them two things to rip you apart about. Then start a thread asking, "If film is better than digital, then why is film dying?" If you survive that... you can rest easy!

:)

[Bill_1856]

How can the most important part of the process be considered drudgery?

If you need to ask, then you'll never understand.

[Bill_1856]

*Photography is 90% sheer, brutal drudgery*
Brett Weston

[RichardSperry]

We need all the film users we can muster but life is too short to deal with the ungrateful and dumb.

I caused two old board trolls to crawl out of their caves by stating that The Law Of Reciprocity, with regard to long film exposures, was more of a suggestion than a law.

You would think that I slandered their troll mothers by the resulting insults.

They are on the 'ignore' list now; the only flaw of which is that that only works when one is logged into the board. And the board kicks logins frequently.

The majority of the film I expose are night photos and infrared photos. Straight reciprocal values, following the Law of Reciprocity, do not apply. Very lenient adjustments need to be made. In addition, in my experience when printing to paper, reciprocity is not exact; a 30 second print at f/11 does not look like a print of 60 seconds at f/16 or 15 seconds at f/8(they are close but there is enough difference to see a difference).

Anyhow, if stating what experienced long exposure photographers should already know to the inexperienced, or asking about long exposure photography in the first place, is dumb; then so be it, Frank. What I found more interesting than the trolls themselves was the toleration of the misinformation and insults from these two, from the other board members. The 'me too's' and 'attaboys' posters, while different, are just the same.

[Frank Petronio]

Richard - Maybe you have a problem with a few individuals here and so what? That's the internet for you. My resentment is saved for the armchair experts who never expose any film - you just explained that you actually make pictures and know what's-what based on experience. I have nothing but respect for that.

But, if writing some newb a 5000-word message explaining what options they might want to consider, or to having them locate my phone number and making an unwelcome call to talk my ear off for the evening, is your idea of me being a troll then I'm guilty.

[Andrew O'Neill]

If you need to ask, then you'll never understand.

Just because Brett said so, doesn't mean it is. I don't find it drudgery at all. Perhaps those that do don't understand.

[Frank Petronio]

Edward probably made Brett work for free and he has some issues there?

[Alan Gales]

All I know is that I paid quite a bit for my 14" Commercial Ektar.

It is by no means an exotic lens but I guess the laws of supply and demand dictated the price. The demand must be up!

[ImSoNegative]

ive also noticed a rise in prices on some gear, especially the commercial ektars, and the speed and crown graphics

[Merg Ross]

Edward probably made Brett work for free and he has some issues there?

No, Brett made the famous "drudgery" comment, twenty years after Edward died, in reference to printing his own portfolios. As far as Brett working for free, he was paid for the Print Project and the Fiftieth Anniversary Portfolio printing of his father's negatives. To stay on topic, I should mention that Brett's second best selling print was from the SL66, not large format.

[Alan Gales]

The SL66 is a fine camera. My friend, Harold has one and 5 lenses. I drool.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Photography overall is enjoying a huge renaissance due to digital. DSLRs are getting to be as cheap as film cameras once were and are arguably better at the majority of uses. Instant feedback and no incremental cost to shooting tens of thousands of images obliterate a couple of traditional barriers to rapid learning and improvement. It's never been a better time to be a photographer, technology-wise. This is bound to spill over into more traditional and LF photography, at some point, as upcoming new masters seek film out for the remaining niches it yet does supremely well. We might all be grateful for the never-shot-film-before noobs, they're the ones who'll keep it fresh and vital. But as far as film GEAR goes, there's gotta be enough Sinar and Calumet rolling stock dumped on the market by pros heading for the exits in the past couple of decades to last another fifty years of art-print making. I see monrails gathering dust when they turn up in retail store counters, for the most part. Nice collectible stuff, moves well here and on eBay, priced right.

[WootSK]

Well, Yosemite Valley is the Disneyland equivalent for LF photographers, and driving around I haven't seen any more numbers of view cameras being set up, but then I haven't seen any less either. FWIW.

Well, it is more easily accessed if you are near and driving. I have to take a a plane from gmt +8 to there and drive a vehicle down if i want to set up my view camera there...

[WootSK]

The old farts should shoot half as well as Mr. Fur.

I don't know who has been mean to any newbs here? Most people are very encouraging and patient, beyond the call of duty when 99% of the questions could be answered ad-nauseam with a simple visit to a search engine or by reading the elaborate articles that grace the frontside of this forum.

If anything I've met a few newbies that are pestering and demanding, yet too stubborn to consider thoughtful, personal advice. Or they are suddenly quite expert at some aspect in spite of the fact that they haven't actually shot anything yet. And I see them a few months later selling off their stupidly-made purchases. Good riddance. We need all the film users we can muster but life is too short to deal with the ungrateful and dumb.

It sounds mean, but I have to strongly agree on it based on what I see and experience.

[E. von Hoegh]

If you need to ask, then you'll never understand.

I'll never understand this attitude. Working in the darkroom is one of the two reasons I avoid digital. Darkroom work is often the most enjoyable part for me, I see the vision I had become reality.

[E. von Hoegh]

It sounds mean, but I have to strongly agree on it based on what I see and experience.

And it is usually the ungrateful, dumb, and obnoxious who complain most vociferously about our supposed nastyness towards the new guys. Go figure.

[E. von Hoegh]

No, Brett made the famous "drudgery" comment, twenty years after Edward died, in reference to printing his own portfolios. As far as Brett working for free, he was paid for the Print Project and the Fiftieth Anniversary Portfolio printing of his father's negatives. To stay on topic, I should mention that Brett's second best selling print was from the SL66, not large format.

I can see where making large numbers of identical prints would become drudgery.

[David A. Goldfarb]

No, Brett made the famous "drudgery" comment, twenty years after Edward died, in reference to printing his own portfolios. As far as Brett working for free, he was paid for the Print Project and the Fiftieth Anniversary Portfolio printing of his father's negatives. To stay on topic, I should mention that Brett's second best selling print was from the SL66, not large format.

I don't recall the exact quote or if I've got my Westons straight, but didn't Edward also say something to Brett along the lines of "let's go into the darkroom and print some money," when printing those editions of popular works? As drudgery goes, it could be worse.

[mandoman7]

I'll never understand this attitude. Working in the darkroom is one of the two reasons I avoid digital. Darkroom work is often the most enjoyable part for me, I see the vision I had become reality.

I don't believe anyone actually enjoys "working" itself. Its always the implications and perceived rewards that are the core motivation. You may not love neutering animals or digging fence post holes, but then love the self reliance and elemental nature of farming and the example it sets for your kids.

[E. von Hoegh]

I don't believe anyone actually enjoys "working" itself. Its always the implications and perceived rewards that are the core motivation. You may not love neutering animals or digging fence post holes, but then love the self reliance and elemental nature of farming and the example it sets for your kids.

Well, I actually enjoy most of the process. Or more accurately, there's none of it I consider "work" - I do it because I choose to - it's one of the things I like to do, and it helps keep me sane. Or somewhat sane.

[ic-racer]

There's more shooting, less darkroom. Digital printing has taken a lot of the drudgery out of large format. I expect that the loss of Polaroid probably nearly delt it a body blow.

Likewise, ray tracing will take all the drudgery out of making exposures with all that heavy-to-move equipment.

[Bill_1856]

Well, I actually enjoy most of the process. Or more accurately, there's none of it I consider "work" - I do it because I choose to - it's one of the things I like to do, and it helps keep me sane. Or somewhat sane.

You mean like mixing chemicals, and then cleaning the trays and solutions and mess at 3 AM before getting up to work at 5 AM? And then reprinting everything the next night because that batch of paper dried down differently? If THAT'S what you call enjoyment....

[Brian Ellis]

How can the most important part of the process be considered drudgery?

I enjoyed my time in the darkroom, I didn't consider it drudgery. However, most of the tasks I performed in there were what I call drudge work, meaning they didn't involve anything creative and instead were simply mechanical tasks that anyone with an hour or two of training could do. E.g. getting things set up, mixing chemicals, setting up trays, maintaining temperatures, putting paper in the easel, focusing the enlarger, moving the paper into and around the various trays, rinsing, washing, drying, cleaning up afterwards, etc. In a four hour session I'd guess maybe 3 1/2 hours were spent doing that kind of thing and a half hour making creative decisions.

It isn't a question of "enjoyment." I actually kind of enjoyed doing all that stuff. It was just part and parcel of the darkroom experience. But I never deluded myself into thinking I was doing anything creative with it so in that sense to me it was "drudge" work.

Which is one of the many reasons I prefer editing and printing digitally - it's just the opposite of the darkroom in the sense that almost all the time spent working on the image is creative work, almost no "drudge work." And before anyone takes offense, this isn't a matter of which is "better," just which I prefer and one of the reasons why. Others prefer the darkroom, and that's fine for them.

[John Kasaian]

There's composing and there's performing. Like Ansel says.:rolleyes:

[Joseph Dickerson]

Just one added perspective...although I don't know what, if anything, it means. I've taught an intro to large format class at the community college (Hancock College, Santa Maria, CA) as part of my regular teaching load. All three times I've offered the class, it takes a couple of years for me to cycle through the classes I offer, it has been full with a wait list.

I often end up helping the students find used gear of their own after they've completed the class. Of course there's always a few who wouldn't do that again on a dare. But there are some "young ins" coming along.

JD

[AFSmithphoto]

Wow, lot of unfounded good ol boy attitude towards "newbies" in this thread, way to go guys....

Yeah I really have to agree. I got into large format years ago, having had my eyes opened to the possibilities by St. Ansel's "The Camera" I had been shooting 35mm and medium format and was more than happy with the size of the prints I could get so long as I was willing to shoot slow film, which as a landscaper, I always was.

It was the potential to manipulate my photographs through movements that lured me in, not big prints. I got a super graphic and loved it so much I got a monorail too because I wanted MORE movements! To this day I shoot a hell of a lot more 6x9 on a roll film back than I do 4x5 because I like the movements and can print as large as I probably ever will from 6x9. The only time I really use 4x5 is for B&W when I want to push/pull a frame a bit or a very rare shot color shot when my 90mm isn't as wide as I want on 6x9.

The point I'm getting to here is that I got into LF for the expressive possibilities and the excitement that would come with the challenges of new techniques, not because I thought that I would magically make bigger and better prints without effort, yet I'll bet, had most of you seen me on any of my LF outings in the first year or two, you might have assumed I just wanted to make big prints from a cool old camera, and that I hadn't the foggiest idea how to actually use it. Even today, I'm not prepared to say I'm close to using the possibilities of my monorail to its maximum expressive potential.

All I'm trying to say, is the next time you see a "newbie" who doesn't seem to know what they're doing, keep in mind that it may not be that they don't care to, its just that they don't know what they're doing . . . yet.

[John Kasaian]

I've always found that experienced photographers are sincerely helpful to newbies. At least they've been patient with my questions and generous with advice. I'll grant that there may be some crabby old f@rt$ out there, but I haven't met any here in cyberspace nor in the real world.
Cheers!

[welly]

Allot of the sales here of "kits" look to me about people getting out of LF. Who knows for sure?

But they're getting bought up, so someone else is using them.

[Joseph O'Neil]

Here in central Canada "Henry's" is the largest " real" camera chain, IMO. The two local stores in my city stock almost no film, but they do stock Ilford in 4x5" right on the shelf.

Locally on the wanted ads - paper,craigslist kijijii, etc, I see film cameras and darkroom gear for sale from time to time. Anything 35mm or medium format - camera and/ or enlarger will sit, but anything large format, which is rare to see to begin with, is snapped up pretty fast.

So I don't know how eveybody defines "on the rise", but when other types of film cameras are going for a pittance compared to their original prices, to see how well anything large format is doing, if that is not "on the rise", at the very least, it sure is doing good, especially when you consider how poor the economy is doing overall.
Joe

[John Kasaian]

If the Chinese are as efficient at building LF cameras as in other things, someone is buying a bunch of LF cameras.
OK thats great.
I don't think I've seen any great developments in film holders (or Fidelity and Lisco would be back in production.) Or new lenses (Nikon & IIRC Congo are out, I'll bet Schneider & Rodenstock are hanging ony the hairs on thier chinny chinn chinns and who knows what Fuji is up to?) Film however appears to be staying the course. The prices being asked for some old gear appears to be rising (demand?) Does this signify a "rise?" Maybe, maybe not.

[Joseph Dickerson]

I've always found that experienced photographers are sincerely helpful to newbies. At least they've been patient with my questions and generous with advice. I'll grant that there may be some crabby old f@rt$ out there, but I haven't met any here in cyberspace nor in the real world.
Cheers!

And some crabby young ones too...:p

My experience has been that the more accomplished/experienced the photographer, regardless of the format they choose, the more open they are with their knowledge. I couldn't begin to count the photographers who have helped me over the years. And like John said, in cyber space, and in the field.

The really crotchity ones, probably couldn't find the asses with both hands tied behind their backs. (to quote my daddy).

JD

[Bill_1856]

, I'll bet Schneider & Rodenstock are hanging ony the hairs on thier chinny chinn chinns and who knows what Fuji is up to?) .

I wonder how Linhof is holding on? They've been making essentionally the same Technika for over 50 years, with only minor upgrades in the camera and major upgrades in price. Except for Government agencies and hedge-fund billionaires, I can't imagine anyone buying a new one, what with all the used ones on the market.

[C. D. Keth]

But they're getting bought up, so someone else is using them.

I see a lot more "I just bought another camera" posts than "I'm just getting into LF" posts.

[John Kasaian]

I see a lot more "I just bought another camera" posts than "I'm just getting into LF" posts.
In my own experience, I haven't bought either a camera or lens in at least a couple of years---likely only film, paper and chemicals. My last "new" lens I re-discovered in a box of stuff that I won on ebay over five years ago!

[E. von Hoegh]

But they're getting bought up, so someone else is using them.

They may be getting bought up, but that doesn't mean they're being used. The huge print craze seems to foster some curiosity about LF film, but the majority (who often have little to no epxerience with film) run away when they see how much effort goes into mastering the processes neccesary to make really good huge prints.

[E. von Hoegh]

I see a lot more "I just bought another camera" posts than "I'm just getting into LF" posts.

My last LF camera purchase was late 1980s, last LF lens was in the late 1990s. Hell, I'm still using frozen 8x10 Tri-X from the '80s.....

[Roger Cole]

You are misquoting (or misinterpreting) me.
It is the darkroom part of film photography, whether Minox or LF, that is druggery for most of us. Not the hauling of 50 pounds of camera, tripod, film, holders, lenses, filters, sunshades, darkcloth, changing bag. meter, gray card, boxes, and bags. Now -- what have I forgotton? I always forget something -- oh yeah, the loupe. Now, what else...?


How can the most important part of the process be considered drudgery?


If you need to ask, then you'll never understand.


Just because Brett said so, doesn't mean it is. I don't find it drudgery at all. Perhaps those that do don't understand.


I'll never understand this attitude. Working in the darkroom is one of the two reasons I avoid digital. Darkroom work is often the most enjoyable part for me, I see the vision I had become reality.

I'm only on page 8 which was a few weeks ago but already ran out of the limit of multiquotes. I agree with E. I love darkroom work. It's quiet, it's meditative, it has a certain magical feel to it, and it gets me away from a damned computer, which is all of my work and much of my other leisure time.