One more question while I'm here - why Large Format?

[Andrew O'Neill]

Large negatives for contact printing in alternative processes.

[Jody_S]

It's performance art. If I just want a picture of something, I use my phone like everybody else.

[6x6TLL]

It's performance art. If I just want a picture of something, I use my phone like everybody else.

Lol!

[Pere Casals]

Pere - I shoot MF because I was never satisfied with the tiny 35mm negatives, or the tonality, resolution, etc.

In theory 35mm MF and LF have the same tonality for the same film (and development). We may use different films in 35mm than in MF, because grain size of the film. I always like the TX grain with MF but only sometimes with 35mm.

I also consider MF being a very powerful size, you made a good choice. A good MF shot delivers more image quality than the eye can discern in most practical situations, grain is delicate and nice or not seen. Nice out of focus roll-off nature, Convenient and portable. It was a very Pro choice.

Today it's still the workhorse of top notch wedding photographers... that's amazing in these digital days.

LF offers you a new set of aesthetical tools, IMHO the motivation to make the step to LF should come from those resources, because you have to enlarge a lot to see the better image quality from LF vs MF.

I'm a newcomer to LF and still exploring those aesthetical resources, this is not something I could get explained in short.
But I still realized that LF has an impressive aesthetical heritage that's for the future. Perhaps one day this will be rediscovered by a mainstream of photographers.

[IanBarber]

I contact print 4x5, and mat it to 8x10. Looks great. The small image is nice to handhold. They make great assemblages - I have some small places in my house that I can stack 3 of these prints on top of each other to make a series (I have done this for 3 images of the same place, for instance). I am learning that dense, busy images do not work, which in hindsight is a bit obvious. Better images have simpler composition and larger elements to stand out in the small size.

I would like to see some examples if you have them. This is something which interests me

[campy]

I am doing it because I can do foolish things at times. I don't have the talent or the patience but I came across a great deal on a Calumet C1 8x10 camera, a Dagor 10 3/4 inch lens and 4 near new film holders for $300 and I said WTF I'll try it. I just found a used tripod to hold the weight and hope to try my first one this weekend. I intend to do contact prints.

[Pere Casals]

Calumet C1 8x10 camera

Yousuf Karsh "settled on the Calumet C-1 8×10 for the vast majority of his work". http://www.anatomyfilms.com/yousuf-k...trait-royalty/

This is well known, but's nice to remember it.

[Mamu]

I was bitten by the shutterbug in '89 when I watched my first paper pinhole neg image form in the developer tray. Personal pleasure is the primary reason my top two weapons of choice are an 8x10 pinhole and a Crown Graphic Special 4x5. Procreation can be achieved in the test tube but many still prefer using the traditional method when possible. All formats serve a purpose, even if as a toy format for children. Traditionally, medium and larger formats offered the excess quality one need to make internegatives or color separations for printing without any easily detected loss of quality. A 6x6 transparency can be enlarged to 4x5 internegative to produce gorgeous 40x60's. Minimizing everything until you have just enough image quality to make the predetermined maximum print size from a camera rendered jpeg seems to be the driving concern these days. You can print awesome 13x19's from a high quality micro 4:3 camera with a good capture / editing. A 4x5 neg gives you the option of doing anything with it, even enlarged negs for contact prints. The average person born after 1970 who hasn't been exposed to pro or advanced ameratuer photography, is probably unaware of medium and larger formats. When you expect an 11x14 print to show grain and then see a 16x20 from 4x5, it's quite impressive (as are ture silver gelatin prints even if produced by lightjet). After thirty years, I don't want to go out and get as much practice capturing images as possible. Occasionally, I go out to shoot and never pull out the camera. I prefer to be in the darkroom with 4 negs rather than at my computer with 400. The 4x5 view camera is the classic tool for learning. I you acquire the understanding and skills to use one, you won't find two many cameras that you can't operate in manual mode once you find the controls. At the end of the day, for me it's about working in and keeping alive the tradition of 20th century fine art black and white photography and doing whatever I can for younger folks who are interested in doing the same. Traditional photography requires not only a financial investment, but investing time and effort. To me, that adds value.

[Corran]

I would like to see some examples if you have them. This is something which interests me

Here's a single image in the 8x10 mat, with a black "frame" added in Photoshop. I frame them with full borders from the film (they are contact printed onto 5x7 paper):



I have a friend who owns a frame shop cut them to my exact dimensions, 10 or 20 at a time.

I would take a pic of one of my triptych assemblages but everything is packed up for art festivals so they aren't hanging at the moment.

[6x6TLL]

Beautiful, Bryan (Corran),

thanks for sharing. It looks great, quite striking.