To go LF or not

[Brian C. Miller]

Welcome to the forum, Krister!

Here's my recommendation: don't bother with a view camera. If the equipment doesn't allow you to do something that you can't do with something else, then don't bother with it.

Cameras are tools used to produce photographs. That's it. I imagine that you are using a digital camera right now. Does it satisfy you? If yes, don't pick up a view camera. If no, then you need a view camera.

Do you need front movements for focus control? Do you need rear movements for perspective control? Do you need shift? If not, you don't need a view camera.

You mention 5x7 or larger. Why? Is it for print size? I've seen a good 17x22 produced from a 12Mp camera. Is it for something else that these formats can give you, rather than 4x5 or medium format?

The reason I picked up a view camera was for the movements to provide better focus and perspective control. When it comes to what quality a view camera can give you, you really need to see the print itself. Not on the web, but physical paper in front of you. Do you still have your LF negatives? Then do the sensible thing and send one of the negatives out to be wet printed, and then have it drum scanned and printed on a digital printer. Then you will be able to decide for yourself what you really want to do.

It all depends on what you really want to create, and that should be the largest factor.

[Jac@stafford.net]

I started out with film a long time ago, both 6x6 and 4x5. It was all analog and the prints were made in the gloomy red light of a darkroom.

Red safe-light? That was way, way long ago. Are you older than 80 years?

After looking at a large amount of LF pictures on the internet I can still not make up my mind. Are they good enough when scanned an digitalized ?

Good enough for what, please?

[David Lobato]

Do you have your 4x5 negatives from those bygone days? If so, then have one scanned. Do you know Photoshop? If you do, then work on the scan to your taste. Then print it. Better if you have a silver print from the negative for comparison. You will then have your answer for using digital methods.

My experience is that the quality is possible but, as in many things, the more effort you put into crafting it yourself the more gratification you will have.

[David Lobato]

Another approach would be to find galleries that display digital prints from large format film. Check out LF photographers' websites and search for show locations and dates. Your answer may be easier to come by this way.

[Jody_S]

Hi everyone.

I am rather new to this forum and its a great source of information for someone
who is contemplating on getting into LF and film.

I started out with film a long time ago, both 6x6 and 4x5. It was all analog and the prints were made in the gloomy red light of a darkroom.
After looking at a large amount of LF pictures on the internet I can still not make up my mind. Are they good enough when scanned an digitalized ?
I don't have the energy or will to once more spend my days in a dark room producing prints.
Is there any of you gentlemen who could be kind enough and send me a scanned original from a 5x7 or larger so I can make up my mind.
It would be very appreciated.

Thanks

Krister

Hi Krister, and welcome to the forum.

As others have now pointed out (I think), if print quality (how do you define print quality?) is all that matters to you, go buy the newest Nikon instead. If you are not printing larger than 1x2m or so, you won't see an improvement with the view camera. And your work flow will be much more familiar with the Nikon. Of course the Nikon will cost a lot more money to purchase, but large format catches up when you count the cost of film and developing, drum scans, etc.

I don't have the energy to do much darkroom work either these days, fortunately I don't have to do so. I scan my negs and use Photoshop for editing, and I have them printed by someone else. I use large format because I like old cameras and especially lenses, and I like the creative process of using a view camera. I don't care that much for pressing a button on an image-making computer like the newest Nikon, and trusting that the result will look like a photograph.

[Ken Lee]

Here is a photo made on 5x7 with a fine lens and medium-grain film, scanned with a consumer-grade scanner.

Here is a photo made with an OK lens on medium-grained 8x10 film, scanned with a consumer-grade scanner. You can extrapolate down to 5x7.

In the end you'll have to decide based on your own subjective criteria.

[Jac@stafford.net]

That is truly a Holy Sh*t demonstration, Ken!

[genotypewriter]

Are they good enough when scanned an digitalized ?
I don't have the energy or will to once more spend my days in a dark room producing prints.

There are some good scans here:
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/lar...l/interesting/

Is there any of you gentlemen who could be kind enough and send me a scanned original from a 5x7 or larger so I can make up my mind.

The problem is there's no such thing as an original. Decent scanners produce files that are rated between 4800-6400dpi typically. Even at 4800 dpi, a full 4x5" scan would be approximately ~418 megapixels which would amount to around 520 megabytes saved as a high quality JPEG. It's unlikely that you're going to find many people willing to do this.

However, I happen to have a 100% crop from a 6400dpi scan I did using a decent $650 scanner in the link below:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/6806479707/

In hindsight I could've actually scanned that very slightly better. With techniques such as wet-mounting, you can get even better contrast. This is the best I can do for you at this stage.

Hope this helps.

[SergeiR]

I have read a lot on this forum. The "problem" is that you only see web pictures.
Some of them are posted in a bigger format so you can look into more detail and then I am not so impressed.
Sorry if I did not put the words right. English is not my native language.
If I can find the answer by looking around I will.

You missed thread then, where people posting large size scans

[Kirk Gittings]

Do I need to say it?