Page 2 of 23 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 226

Thread: LF Clarification

  1. #11
    Randy Moe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    8,249

    Re: LF Clarification

    It is done and settled and I can live with the new rules.

    Thank you all, especially our benefactor Q T Luong!

  2. #12
    Corran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    GA, USA
    Posts
    4,943

    Re: LF Clarification

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Noel View Post
    I agree with the moderators. The size of the film should be the major consideration. If not the now lost in history 35mm camera with almost full movements would have to be considered as LF. They are providing an area for other formats in the "everything else" area. It finally relieves having to work through the smaller formats to see what is up in LF. If some are unhappy with this, why don't they start a "Smaller than Large Format" forum.
    Frankly I would love to see a 35mm camera with movements, ha!
    But what are you talking about , "work through the smaller formats to see what is up in LF?" The number of rollfilm back images being posted before was never that huge, or significant at all, in my opinion.

    And I'm sorry but if we can't "discuss" this change in policy, why should we even have a post about it? This is a forum, not state-run media. 6x12 and 6x17 is large format as far as I'm concerned, considering I use a traditional LF camera for it, so, I'm giving my opinion.
    Bryan | Blog | YouTube | Instagram
    All comments and thoughtful critique welcome

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    7,817

    Re: LF Clarification

    Quote Originally Posted by Corran View Post
    ...I'm sorry but if we can't "discuss" this change in policy, why should we even have a post about it? This is a forum, not state-run media.
    The most recent discussion of the topic was within the last month or so, and there were 200 posts.

    See Request clarification of large format.

  4. #14
    Kirk Gittings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico
    Posts
    9,714

    Re: LF Clarification

    And I'm sorry but if we can't "discuss" this change in policy, why should we even have a post about it? This is a forum, not state-run media. 6x12 and 6x17 is large format as far as I'm concerned, considering I use a traditional LF camera for it, so, I'm giving my opinion.
    Who said we can't discuss it-I can't find it? I don't think our discussions will change anything. This forum is not a democracy-but that is another question.
    Thanks,
    Kirk

    at age 67
    "The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
    But I have promises to keep,
    And miles to go before I sleep,
    And miles to go before I sleep"

  5. #15
    Corran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    GA, USA
    Posts
    4,943

    Re: LF Clarification

    Clarification: Jim said if we (I) were unhappy, go start a "smaller than LF" forum. I took that statement to mean he thinks I should not be expressing my opinion. Sorry. Of course he is not a mod, so I didn't mean to imply the moderators made that statement/implication.
    Bryan | Blog | YouTube | Instagram
    All comments and thoughtful critique welcome

  6. #16
    Mark Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    5,136

    Re: LF Clarification

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Barker View Post
    We would also consider a digital back with a nominal sensor size of 4"x5" or larger to be LF, as well, regardless of technology...
    So a "4x5" Better Light scanning back that actually has a slightly smaller than 3x4-inch scanning area will no longer be considered large format?
    "I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."

  7. #17
    DannL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    OK, USA
    Posts
    283

    Re: LF Clarification

    I won't argue LFF's reasoning for using the term to describe Large Format, But, I think if the research was accomplish to locate the origins of the term and it's reason for being it will be discovered that . . . a Linhof engineer coined the term specifically for advertising their 6x9 view cameras around 1951/1952 . Stating that 6x9 was the threshold for between Large Format film and all smaller format.

    I consider 6x9 as the threshold between LF and the smaller formats. Referring to the frame size, and not the films structure. It's better to be inclusive than exclusive, and it allows for at least one film, 120, both sheet and roll into the arena.
    "Photography is a marvelous discovery, a science that has attracted the greatest intellects, an art that excites the most astute minds and one that can be practiced by any imbecile." Nadar, 1856

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    7,817

    Re: LF Clarification

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Sawyer View Post
    So a "4x5" Better Light scanning back that actually has a slightly smaller than 3x4-inch scanning area will no longer be considered large format?
    Correct.

    We had to draw the line somewhere and 4x5 is where the line was drawn.

    If the Better Light "4x5" sensor were actually 4x5 inches in size, it would be considered Large Format by the forum moderators.

    Going forward, images made with that back are welcome here, just not in the Large Format section.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    4,585

    Large format is not about film size, it's about state of mind

    I've said it before, and I'll insist on it again:
    "Large Format is not about film size -- it's about state of mind."

    (What The Forum is about may be something entirely different.)
    Wilhelm (Sarasota)

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    3,328

    Re: LF Clarification

    If an image is shot on 4x5 (or larger) film but the portion of the negative used in the final crop is less than 4" in its shortest dimension, what then?

    Jonathan

Similar Threads

  1. Some Process Clarification, Please
    By Will Whitaker in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 27-Jul-2013, 12:42
  2. zs clarification
    By coops in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 4-May-2011, 17:44
  3. Kodak T Max 400 LF/ULF Clarification
    By Michael Kadillak in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 20-Dec-2005, 08:13
  4. Clarification about Pyro
    By steve simmons in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 17-Jun-2004, 20:07
  5. Go to 4x5 or Stay with 6x6 - I need some clarification
    By Hugh Sakols in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 1-Nov-2003, 09:55

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •