Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
No, it's just a pocket camera... although you might need rather large pockets.
What really matters is that you're having fun.
-rob
Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bob Salomon - HP Marketing
So the question is really moot.
Yes and no, I suppose.
From a practical standpoint I often don't do too much different with a roll film back on a LF camera than I do with sheet film. Other times I do... like hand-holding. Of course, that can with either roll film or sheet film. so that supports the "mootness" of the difference.
But sometimes people have different objectives. If one is a literalist then adherance to a definition is important... and the question is very relevant. Similarly, if one's objective is bigotry the drawing lines is very important. In those types of situations it isn't a good thing to have confusion or any confounding understandings.
As far as photogprahy goes, I see the difference only as an equipment isse that has little to do with image-making. so, ya... the question is really moot.
p.s. a 35mm back... I need to check that out. Will it fit any camera with a Graflock back or is it dedicated?
Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
I'm thinking of strapping a JATO rocket onto my Corvair. So, do you guys consider my car to be an airplane?
Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
No... if all four wheels get off the ground it is still a rocket; Airplanes have wings. If the wheels stay on the ground it is going to be one very fast Corvair!
Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
darr
Interesting. I do not visit the Lounge. Was it mean-spirited or educational? ;)
Darr,
Like you I avoided the lounge for a long time. For me the mindless rants and vitriol did not engender respect for the participants. Since the change of the rules, the lounge has become far more civil. There are some good threads that are worth looking at.
Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
al olson
Darr,
Like you I avoided the lounge for a long time. For me the mindless rants and vitriol did not engender respect for the participants. Since the change of the rules, the lounge has become far more civil. There are some good threads that are worth looking at.
Thanks Al. I will take a look. I do enjoy a good thread. :)
Darr
Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
Mortenson, in his book "The Negative", drew the "MF/LF" line right through the middle of 4x5. According to him, 6x9 was firmly in the MF camp, and about half the time, so was 4x5, depending on the application and intent of the photographer.
Re: so, do you guys consider my 6x9 to be "large format"?
Opinions differ, even within the same household. I see my 2x3 Graphics and 2x3 Cambo as on the cusp between MF and LF, so I'm with that Linhof weasel. 6x7, definitely MF. 4x5, definitely LF. But if I had to commit myself to one or the other, 2x3 is MF.
My wife is a 35 mm shooter exclusively, won't even try to use any of my 2x3 gear. She says 2x3 is LF. I know better than to disagree with her.