11x14 pro an cons?

[John Kasaian]

michael,

I think 11x14 is a beautifully proportioned negative and well worth exploring. Be aware that the cost of film holders is outrageously expensive, but if you happen on to a kit with a few holders that go with it, then it shouldn't take the fun out of shooting. At around $200+ each, three holders will set you back the same amount as a good lens! An excellent alternative already mentioned is the 8x10, but if you really like the proportions of 11x14 you might try a 5x7 first just to see if you've got the temperment for LF. With a larger lensboard and longer bellows than the 4x5, you can mount a 14" lens with the view of moving up to 11x14 later on. You can also get a heavy tripod which you'll also need if you move up to 11x14 later on. The advantages are that you'll be able to learn the potential of LF cameras as well as to use sheet film using less expensive materials( and more economical amounts of chemistry) and you'll already have a good portion of your "kit" if and when you decide to move up. You'll also have a 5x7 camera to trade in, and if you decide LF isn't for you you won't have spent an obscene amount of money in the process. OTOH, if you luck out on finding a good affordable 11x14 kits grab the ball and run with it!

[wfwhitaker]

Serious amateur photography isn't a rational endeavor anyhow....

I'm out of here.

[CXC]

I think 11x14 is a great way to go. Stepping up from 8x10, I bought a 12x20, but that thing is so cumbersome that it is a major production to use it at all, and forget trying to get any substantial distance away from the car. IMHO 11x14 is the largest non-panoramic camera that it is possible to carry in a backpack, as well as being an optimum viewing size.

One down side is that they are really hard to find used.

And the cost can add up in a hurry. It would be a useful exercise to add up the full cost of tooling up, and estimate the cost of each print.

[MIke Sherck]

I don't use 11x14 myself due to the cost but another photographer I've photographed with got one about a year ago (I believe it's a Wisner,) and I've been photographing with him a couple of times since, so I have a few observations which may be helpful.

1. You won't carry an 11x14 outfit very far: it's heavy and bulky. You'll want a cart to haul it on if you go any distance from transportation. Luggage carts are not the answer: the wheels are too small and too close together. You can make it work but it's remarkably inconvenient. On the other hand, with some form of transport like that you can go just about anywhere and tote the thing through woods and over trails for hours.

2. an 11x14 contact print is something to behold. Heck, just the negative is darned impressive!

3. You need some serious stand-off distance to see the entirety of that big, gorgeous ground glass. It's like having spent your life looking at the world through a toilet-paper tube and all of a sudden someone introduces you to a window. My focusing cloth is 4' x 5' and for my friend's 11x14 camera, a bit bigger would have been useful. The first time I looked at an 11x14 ground glass, I have to confess that I forgot to breathe for a while...

4. EVERYTHING is more expensive. You don't want to think about what 11x14 color or transparency film goes for. Also, since everything costs more, you'll have less of it. On the other hand, only having two film holders (loaded with expensive film) will teach you to fold the camera and move on if you have doubts about the picture. Good discipline!

If I could at all afford it I'd do it in a heartbeat, but that's just my opinion. Considering the cost and difficulty of using one of these beasts, you really need to think it through before you make the investment. I hope that you do, though. In my opinion, far too many of us LF types opt for the convenience of 4x5 and never get around to exploring the world through a bigger glass.

Mike

[Jim Galli]

The jump between 8X10 and 11X14 is not what you would think. You've doubled the inches square fair enough but I can tell you from experience don't think for a minute it's 2X as much work. It is more like 10X. I have both. The 810 can go out with me almost weekly. It pleasures me. The 11X14 rarely goes anywhere. 1 to 2 times a year. And that's on a trip where I know the photos will be close to the pickup. The best thing the 11X14 does is make the 8X10 seem small. Even the 7X17 seems dainty next to the 11X14. 11X14 and 8X20 are somewhat equivalent in weight and execution. For me I guess the 820 pays the bigger dividend. It gets out several times a season.

[michael Allen]

Guys,
I appreciate all the input especially from some of the more advanced members I recognized. I spoke with Ron Phillips about a camera and has one left in 11x14 that a customer has not decided on. Through some of my research, I'm finding Wisner P series fits my crtiteria and budget but I've read some horror stories about quality and delivery issues. I'm using an Ebony right now and would like to try and have some of the same qualities in mjy prospective 11x14 system, but there price is clearly out of range, any suggestions would be helpfull.

[e]

11x14 will knock your socks off! Period! Phillips is short on bellows draw but very tight, Canham is light but expensive and some complain of the wiggle in the back section and the lighter metal used. Good woodworking though.Wisner is pretty light (P model) but has great bellows draw and is not a lot of bucks....at least in comparason to Ebony and Canham and nice metal and now a better made bellows of sheepskin on all their ULF cameras....but challenged in other ways as you are aware. Pick your poison man! My take is to use a Wisner geared 7x17 at 10 lbs most of the time as it is frugal on film at $2.50 a sheet from Photowarehouse in CA. When I want to bring the 12x20 out for a stroll...I need to be in the mood. I might in the future use a 16x20 or an 18x22 with the 7x17 instead of the 12x20 but this is just a thought. Some of the best contact prints I've seen recently were Michael and Paula's in 4x5 to 18x22. The 18x22's were breathtaking! The size of the camera is part of the journey. You may go big then smaller then back again...who knows...but you will certainly have a gas along the way no matter which camera you choose. Emile. www.deleon-ulf.com

[John D Gerndt]

There are cameras out there that can be converted from 8x10 to 11x14. If you are buying new you could go this route with safety. If you are very handy with tools you could do it yourself. It is an option not previously mentioned.

One other thing not previously mentioned is that it is quite possible to enlarge 8x10 negatives and less so with 11x14. 8x10 also affords more choices of film. It will be easier to unload a 8x10 too if you must move up. Contact printers are cheaper and easier to find, paper is cheap by comparison while you learn how to best make contact prints (it is not like enlarging).

You can see my lean in this matter. I jumped right from 8x10 to 12x20 and found it more than I wanted to chew. It requires a LOT more space and materials, more than I realized even with all the research and thinking I could muster. You just got to do it to believe it I guess.

I say try an 8x10 first and see what you think. You could spend a year with a used one and re-sell it at only a hundred dollars loss I'd bet. Buy you lens well so that it will cover 11x14 just in case you need to move up. A 12 inch Dagor is a good bet.

IMHO...

[Robert Skeoch]

I have an 8x10 and have considered moving up. I don't think I'ld go 11x14 though. It seems you only take out the ULF when you "know" there's a picture there. No hiking and looking around. For all the extra work, effort and costs I'm thinking 16x20 would be more worth the effort. Just an idea.
-Rob

[jerry brodkey]

Two comments:

For me the main reason to do 11X14 was that I wanted to do large Platinum prints which require contact printing. While
some people are making large negatives from smaller ones using a scanner and a computer or enlarging onto negative material, it may be that something is lost in these processes. It is arguable, but I would sooner be out shooting than working in those other ways. Michael A. Smith seems to have someone who can build a UV head for an enlarger but I don't know if there is one yet available or how much it might be or how easy it will be to obtain....Any of the alternative processes will probably require
a contact print at least in the near future.

The Phillips is a great camera. I have an 8X10 and had an 11X14 but sold it. It is light and stable which are hard to find together
in any other camera of that size. The problem for me was that the back doesn't rotate and I shoot more than 50% verticals which made it a real pain to use. I also tried the Canham but have settled on a Roseman because for me stability is more important
than lightness.

Just my 2 cents....

Jerry