I heartily '+1' the film, but not the method. If you're going to shoot 120, why bother with an LF setup? How often do you really need movements in the backcountry (prunes, lighter and tastier, are good for that anyway)? The slight LF movements sometimes needed to establish near–far relationships are mostly entirely within the extra DOF gained with MF cameras and lenses. Not to mention, reduced wind shake.Originally Posted by Robert Oliver
That's fine advice (), until you come across that once in a lifetime shot in a difficult and/or distant location, where the light, atmosphere, wind, yada, yada, yada, conspire against you from the time you see IT to the time you are able to set up and trip the shutter. Then you have to take the shot anyway with somewhat less then all those factors still extant, and less becoming likely with each passing microsecond. Then, the wind stops. Another exposure. Then, the light you thought couldn't be better becomes ethereally transmogrative (don't bother looking it up, I made it up 'cause it sounded right
). Another shot. Then, you look behind you before breaking down (you always do that, right?) and IT's much better than your last shot, so you spin the camera around level, expose, and shoot as quickly as possible before another IT goes away. Damn, forgot to adjust filter factor, bellows length, double exposed last holder 'cause you forgot to reverse the slide, yada, yada, yada. So you begin to take down and... Damn!!! – look around to the original scene and IT is even more incredibly incredible! Why-oh-why didn't I stay wit that set up?!? Set up once more while the light fades at, well, the speed of light. Everything's changed! Where's your light meter? ...Oh No!!...I muuust haave one laaast sheet! I, I know it.
. Half a day's film holders used for one "scene". Of course, I'm not saying this has ever hapened to me.
"Edit harshly" – puleeaze. A realist brings sufficient film and a way to change it. Are you sure you've ever backpacked with a camera?
Happy Independence Day.
Back when I started exploting the Sierra Nevada with a camera I would come across a view that resonated and "wow" grabbed the camera and took a shot. About 10 steps further it appeared even better and another shot. Ten more steps and it looked even better and another shot...well, you get the picture. If I showed all in a slide show you'd say, "well why didn't you take it from there in the first place?" But how are you going to learn that without having had that experience?
Thomas
Another beginner’s mistake – not expecting to see any shots when you’re returning on the same trail, and therefore having no remaining film when you discover the best shot of the hike!
The fireworks have now died down here on the west coast and I wanted to take a moment to wish everyone a happy Fourth.
A lot of good feedback here. One of the principal questions comes down to how much film is enough. When day hiking, I normally pack six holders, which seems to be enough even when I get caught in one of those shifting light "ah ha" moments. Backpacking, however, is a different animal. I'm much too old and cranky to carry anything more than absolutely necessary...in my case, a Reis tripod would never make it out of the house:-). And six film holders would not make it either. So how many are necessary. I've figured three, maybe four if I have a way of reloading during the day. The Grafmatic idea is a good one. I don't own one, but I did weigh three Fidelity Elite film holders and confirmed the weight provided by dave_whatever. And, yes, a 77 gram reduction counts. As it happens, I recalled that Chamonix is offering 4x5 holders made from carbon fiber, which turn out to weigh 140 grams each. As compared to the Fidelity Elite, these would shave about 20% in weight and are even lighter that the Grafmatic option( albeit a bit more pricey). So, if I figure on three holders (450 grams) and another 200 grams for boxed film, the only thing remaining is a method of loading in the field.....in daylight.
I have a changing tent which would do the job nicely, but it weighs over two pounds and won't make the cut. The lightest solution I can come up with reverts back to a method I used 25 years ago: a plastic garbage bag and a few well chosen Tinker Toys. The Tinker Toys are very light and used to build a frame one slides into the bag with the film and the holders. Even a 3 mil bag, however, lets in light, so a dark cloth is used over the top (while in a tent). The the total weight of this setup is about 300 grams, so I'm all in at about two pounds. Not great, but not too bad. Maybe I could add a fourth holder....just in case.
I was hoping to find a more high tech approach, but perhaps in a world of shrinking options, simple tricks will suffice. Anyone have a better/lighter idea?
So carrying 3 Grafmatics instead of 9 film holders would save you 1/2 pound. Definitely a weight to be considered. Not sure if the risk/hassle of a jammed septum is worth 8 ounces of saved weight. I've heard they can be problematic from time to time.
I think the minimum amount of film I would want ready to shoot would be about 18 shots. I can only imagine having to reload holders as Santa Clause, Bigfoot and Elvis stop in front of you to pose for a picture.
I took 60 sheets on my solo, 5 day Rae Lakes trip. I finished the trek with a couple of unexposed sheets, but wish I would have had a few smore... Passed up a couple of pretty cool shots just because I kept thinking there was a better shot around the bend.
9 holders would be 3.77 pounds. 3 grafmatics would be 3.27 pounds.
Readyload/Quickload had it's own issues too... took up a fair amount of space. I can't remember how many Readyloads you had to carry before it was more efficient to carry 9 or 10 holders and boxes of film.
These weight concerns become less significant if you can share some of your sheter/kitchen/first aid with a friend.
Robert Oliver
I shoot 5X7 and don't go on any LONG hikes, though I have packed it to the Diving Board at Yosemite and spent many nights in a sleeping bag cover with a pad at Shiprock. I've got an F64 pack. I take 8-10 holders- very heavy, and a changing bag and film. I reload after dark on the pad. I'd rather shoot too much film than miss a shot. Just too hard to get somewhere.
The tripod is the real bear, even a Gitzo with carbon fiber legs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM3FElHofic
Here's some of that ethereal light. Notice the horizon is dark on one side....then dark on the other. You have to keep shooting and can really burn through the film holders. I asked Ansel once why he didn't shoot the second side of the holder at Hernandez and use it to test developing. He'd thought about it and replied "I SHOULD have!"
I still have a small inventory of Quickloads, but otherwise am keeping the options open. I have a couple of nice Harrison film tents and am familiar with using them.
On a couple of long trips in the high Sierra I experimented with Horseman 6x9 holders. I hate printing roll film, but got some wonderful shots anyway, and am getting
some excellent prints - not really big prints of course, but I have more than enough 8x10 shots on hand to keep me busy for a long time anyway, when I want to
print big. For dayhiking I generally use either a Sinar Norma 4x5 or my 8x10 Phillips. Next year I'm planning a three-week backpack in steep terrain, so may resort to
a cheap trick like having someone younger haul some of my food, so I can devote more room to film. I'm not really eager to be carrying an 80 lb pack at retirement
age, at least for three weeks straight! ... don't mind it for dayhikes, however.
I use 2-3 grafmatics and the smallest harrison changing tent, which weighs about 2 lbs. I switched to an ultralight tent and other equipment to minimize the weight, but the pack is still about 60 lbs for a 2-4 day trip.
I have some negatives from a changing bag that are unuseable due to dust, lint, etc. That experience convinced me that changing tents are the only way to go.
Peter Y.
Oh.... a sixty pound pack.... something on my wish list for old age. The ultralight tent helps, but only for summer... I'd hate to be in a serious storm above timberline
with one of those (mine is reasonably comfortable in a downpour or temporary snowstorm if I can tie it down well, but no substitute for my Bibler, which weighs twice
as much). And I invested in a 800-fill Patagonia goosedown sweater, which is just as warm as my old down jacket. ... but gosh, I miss Quickloads. I tried my old
Mido II holders on one trip - compact, but only about a 35% weight savings, and some light leaks near the corners, sometimes insignificant, but sometimes enough to ruin the composition. If I can find time to test all these Mido holders individually, maybe only particular ones will be suspect. Once cannot conveniently use a
film tent under just any conditions. The last two long trips had wild weather half of every day - a lightwt tent would work with a film tent only if it had a big
vestibule. ... but I'm tired of spending money on gear.... need it for gas and film!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks