Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 59

Thread: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

  1. #31

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Posts
    3,064

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    Sorry for any confusion -- do not have a CF pod. I did strap the A100 to the back rack. If I had been riding on a road I would have put on a red flag on its end! The A250 head was over the raised part of the rack (in the front) so I did not have to worry about it sliding back.

    The Gitzo (Al) series 3 pod I took on the bike tour was strapped on top of gear on the back rack. The pod, sleeping bag, and my tent were strapped on the back rack cross-wise. Day trips the Gitzo was strapped length-wise with bungi-cords. I would consider a closed-cell foam pad between the rack and a CF pod.
    Thanks Vaughn.

    I've been thinking about buying a bicycle for exercise. I can remove part of the bed to my Wehman and then use the strap to secure two 8x10 lens holders in it's place. I'd still have plenty of bed for my 250mm or even my 14" lens. I could carry that in a front basket along with a lens, loupe, spot meter and dark cloth. I was just wondering how I could strap my J100 Ries to it.

    Well, got medical bills to pay, need new glasses, a new Jeep soft top, etcetera, before a bicycle. Always got bills!

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    1,326

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    William Henry Jackson used mules to haul the gear. 18x22 glass plates.

    http://www.historycolorado.org/blogs...american-west/
    ” Never attribute to inspiration that which can be adequately explained by delusion”.

  3. #33
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    9,206

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    Alan, I would say my experiment to bike with an 8x10 was a limited success. The pod was a little awkward sticking out that far behind, but not bad. I carried the camera body in its backpack on my back -- holders and lens went into the panniers. I do not like things on my back when riding, but I wanted the pack as I was going to walking over a lot of sand and did not want to push the bike over it.

    The main problem was that I steeply decended about an elevation of 900 feet down an old road/trail and I stayed at the beach until sunset (the light finally got nice!). The trail was too steep to ride up on and it got dark on me before I got 1/4 way up the trail (and no flashlight -- and under the redwoods, it gets very dark very quickly!) Then I had development issues and none of the negs worked out...so it goes!

    But other than that, I now know I can get around on the bike with the 8x10 -- with some modifications to my method. But the 5x7 would be a lot more practical!
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  4. #34

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Posts
    3,064

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    Vaughn, Thanks for replying.

    I had a back fusion back in December of 1994. I've got arthritis in my back and I'm slowly getting worse as I age. I'm 55 right now. Walking is good for me so I have a membership at the local YMCA where they have a rubberized track. A bike would mix things up a bit and be more fun. I'll just be riding the streets in my neighborhood which are relatively flat. I figure a 3 speed comfort bike will work just fine. I was planning on getting a handlebar basket so I can pick up a few things at the local grocery store. We have a really nice park near us with a small lake with lots of ducks and geese. There are also some old buildings in our neighborhood to photograph. I know I could just take my Jeep but riding around on a bicycle with an 8x10 just seems like fun.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Posts
    3,064

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    Vaughn,

    Here is the bike I'm interested in. It's a three speed with coaster brakes and a belt drive system like a Harley Davidson motorcycle. Economical and as maintenance free as you can get.

    https://www.prioritybicycles.com/pro...riorityclassic

  6. #36
    8x20 8x10 John Jarosz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Iowa
    Posts
    663

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    For me 8x10 is much easier than 8x20 to carry around. I usually only break out the 8x20 when I'm sure there's a good image beforehand (meaning I've been to that location before). The 8x10, one lens, and a couple of holders, dark cloth all fit in one shoulder bag. That's easy. The tough part is the tripod. I have 2 that can be used. I prefer the larger heavier one that's specifically for the 8x20, but for longer walks with the 8x10 I take the lighter one.
    I'm going to be 68. It is getting to the point of being not practical. Sooner or later it will have to stop. But not yet.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Central TX
    Posts
    580

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    build a lightweight 8x20 fixed focus? Or, as a pinhole? or near pinhole i.e. simple lens plus f64 stop or a series of card stops at f22, 32, 45, 64?? could be a massive weight reduction? I've seen designs where you use a changing bag to move film from a compartment in the back of the camera to the picture taking place (admittedly for 5x8 pinhole camera) and then you don't have to have film holders. Just trying to keep you at it longer. 68 doesn't seem as old as it once did...(I'm looking at 49 this Spring).

  8. #38
    chassis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,974

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    Greg, good question. What's your view on the comments so far?

    My process lately has been to previsualize an image, or plan an image that I want to make. This previsualization can take days, weeks or longer.

    Then I pack the camera, 1 film holder with 1 or 2 sheets of film, loupe, dark cloth and light meter, and the lens that works with my visualization. This is not a big burden. I think it would be manageable for 8x10 and 11x14.

    Then I make an image.

    After processing and evaluation, I decide if the image works or it doesn't. The process begins again if necessary. This works if the location can be repeatedly accessed, and the photographer is to some degree intimately familiar with it. To me, part of the reason for the impact Ansel Adams' images had and have is because of his intimate familiarity with the subject. There is a fair amount written on this, the intimacy between photographer and subject.

    Clearly this doesn't work if the destination is once in a lifetime and the photographer is unfamiliar. In such a case I would either plan alot of time on location (days if needed), or use a smaller format or digital.

  9. #39
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    9,206

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Gales View Post
    Vaughn,

    Here is the bike I'm interested in. It's a three speed with coaster brakes and a belt drive system like a Harley Davidson motorcycle. Economical and as maintenance free as you can get.

    https://www.prioritybicycles.com/pro...riorityclassic
    Too many hills here for a three speed! Here is what I may need 10 years from now (with a trailer!) -- I'll be in my 70s. https://www.radpowerbikes.com/pages/radrover

    But for the next ten years, this is what I think I'd want to haul my 8x10 around on: http://surlybikes.com/bikes/big_dummy
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Collinsville, CT USA
    Posts
    2,327

    Re: Practicality of using LF and especially ULF in the field

    Quote Originally Posted by chassis View Post
    Greg, good question. What's your view on the comments so far?
    Thanks for all the input. Have been reading that more and more Platinum/Palladium printers, including Carl Weese, have gone to shooting digital and making digital negs. My FX digital camera and lenses about equal to my 8x10 outfit in weight. Backpack for the FX equipment is a circa 1980s Dana Design. Backpack for the 8x10 equipment a f64. The Dana Design rides on my back so much better than the f64 but back in the 1980s I paid much more for the Dana Design then for the f/64 two years ago. Scouting the area beforehand a great idea but just not for me. Will definitely be getting a shotgun sling for carrying the tripod... shoulder caring the tripod have been doing up to now, but shoulder gets sore at times and lowering my center of gravity with the sling a real plus when hiking class 3 and 4.

Similar Threads

  1. How do I get my 8X10 field camera and gear out into the field
    By steve Barth in forum Location & Travel
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 30-Dec-2006, 09:16
  2. Depth of Field calculation in the field
    By Don Wallace in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 31-Oct-2004, 16:54
  3. Rangefinder Accuracy & Practicality on Horseman's/Linhoff's
    By Howard Slavitt in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 6-Oct-2000, 15:24

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
  •