Although this has been done before by Clifford Ross, and
it is very far from being the largest format used,
there is now
this gigapxl.org website that has plenty of fascinating technical details about
a 9x18 camera optimized for ultimate resolution (rather than contact printing).
The thing that distinguishes this effort, for me, from Ross's is the care taken to keep the camera to spec, going so far as to make their own lens because the Schneiders don't cover 9x18 with enough resolution for their purposes. They don't focus like a normal view camera, they use a laser rangefinder and move the lens elements to maintain resolution. They don't have a viewfinder per se; they use a Nikon. Of course they use a vacuum film back. And on and on; the big tripod is almost 40 pounds! They went with an ultra wide lens because they calculated that air turbulence would ruin the fine detail at infinity. They use a 20x rifle scope to detect subject movement.
All this would be moot if the pictures weren't good, but the two they show in the image gallery are not bad IMHO; the reflecting pool is, I think, the better of the two.
I find myself wondering idly if something much better can be achieved for landscape shots; they believed turbulence would be enough of an issue that they built an ultra-wide lens so they could achieve their 30 lp/mm goal, and it just makes 30 lp/mm over a 500mm image circle. To do better (let's arbitrarily set a target of 4 gigapixels) would require a lens that could make 60 lp/mm over a 500mm image circle or a lens that could make 30 lp/mm over a 1000mm image circle, film that could do it (if we look at B&W, this isn't that hard to come by), the atmospheric conditions would have to be very still to convey that level of detail, the demands on the tripod are even more amazing, etc. A lens like that could probably be manufactured. Film exists. An even more amazing tripod could be found/made. But the atmospheric conditions strike me as more troublesome, as those can't really be changed easily.
I am surprised to see that in spite of all the preparation and care, the photo displayed here by Mr. Ross feels like little more than a snapshot rendition of the mountain, taken from the side of the road. Never mind inspiration, the image is not even level.
I hope that the experience of working with this superb equipment will help their inventors attain a correspondingly deeper level of artistic inspiration.
Sorry !
In all fairness to Mr. Ross, I just had a look at his other work. In addition to being an inventor and a craftsman, he is definitely a photographic artist. Perhaps his R1 photo was meant merely as a sample shot, to demonstrate the resolution of the camera.
I apologize !
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
(please forgive me, I just couldn't resist....)
I think the idea of Ross's Mountain 1 photo is that even if you take a snapshot of a natural subject, if it is blown up large enough with enough detail,
it will elicit a strong response from the viewer. I notice that on the Gigapixel site they also dwelve on the public reaction to images. One could say that eventually it boils down to that, and provoking a reaction based on information content rather than artistic content is an interesting experiment. Images by photographers such as Gursky would combine both, but although there
are conceptual ideas, I'd think that for most viewers, the novelty would be in the huge sizes and resulting information density.
< I am surprised to see that in spite of all the preparation and care, the photo displayed here by Mr. Ross feels like little more than a snapshot rendition of the mountain, taken from the side of the road. Never mind inspiration, the image is not even level. >
Does it have to be ?
Did I miss something or is it just that he is scanning ULF on a good scanner to get a larger file? Why not scan a 16x20 from a ULF Wisner, or 12 x 20 from a hundred-year old banquet camera, or better yet, a 10 x 60 from a Cirkuit camera? Even with a lowly Epson I can create a huge file - so what is the big deal here? I could put the ULF film on a higher end Creo/Scitex flatbed and make a huge file, although I imagine I might need somebody to modify the scanner driver if there is a limitation. As far as I know, Photoshop CS is built to handle 4gb files provided you have the right hardware (a dual G5 with 8gb RAM to start...).
Other than building a more solid camera with precise alignment, and being anal about the film plane flatness - both of which were addressed by aerial cameras fifty years ago - I'm left thinking that this project is about money and a good publicist to get the press kits out...
I did enjoy seeing his earlier work with waves and water reflections - nothing earth shattering but nicely done and great decorations.
"I did enjoy seeing his earlier work with waves and water reflections - nothing earth shattering but nicely done and great decorations."
I much prefer these
http://www.metmuseum.org/Works_of_Art/images/ph/images/ph1994.144.8.L.jpg
http://www.assemblylanguage.com/artpiecepictures/Sugimoto.JPG
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/gallery/2002/08/07/BassStrait
an added bonus is that you don't have to worry so much about all that gigabyte and ultimate film flatness stuff
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
to which Kouldeka replied (who poked his head around the door during the imnterview) 'you are so full of shit Henry'
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks