Its usually advertised in View Camera magazine. I don't know for sure if it still being held or not, but with all the interest in ULF I can't imagine why it wouldn't be.
Hey Frank! You want to teach workshops---heres your chance---ULF on the east coast!
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
Another thought. Folmer and Schwing did produce an 11x14 Skyscraper model especially for architecture. You might check out one of those.
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
One other consideration is that for architectural photography, most of the work we see is done with 4x5 or smaller formats because it is really hard or impossible to adequately get the parrallel near-far subjects sharp enough with the larger 8x10 plus formats. As Oren distinctly mentioned, but might have been lost in the static, you make different sorts of images with different sized cameras. A square Rollei can be wonderful, but the same scene may not translate into 4x5 or larger format.
Think of Frederick Evans' architectural photos... they have large areas that are not sharp. Wheras the ULF work by Watkins, O'Sullivan, and the other old topographic photographers often avoid showing much of a foreground.
Now that I think of it, pick up the Darius Kinsey books... he mastered all this many years ago.
Last edited by Frank Petronio; 23-Jun-2006 at 20:42.
Getting enough movement out of an 11x14 for general landscape work, both in terms of what movements the camera allows and in terms of the image circle of your lenses, is generally not a problem.Originally Posted by alec4444
Architecture as a specialized application could be a problem, depending on exactly what you have in mind. The one common lens type that is essentially impossible to find at a moderate price for 11x14 is ultrawide angle lenses. At 305mm, which is roughly equivalent to 225mm on 8x10, you can, for example, use a G-Claron, which is compact, moderately priced, and when stopped way down will have an image circle that allows for reasonable movement. But there's no moderately-priced counterpart in 11x14 to the big 150-165mm ultrawides designed for 8x10. If you have $3000 you can buy a 210 SSXL (add another $1000 or so if you want the center filter), which will cover with a bit of movement. The discontinued 200 Grandagon and 210 SA have comparable image circles but are also quite expensive when you can find them, and are monstrously big and heavy (~6-7 lb.). Also, for interiors, DOF and reciprocity issues can become overwhelming.
Alec, seems like you sorted a lot of the issues .... as for the ones your on the fence with....
Movements... Schneider makes two new ULF lenses, called Fine art lenses, I think they run $5k for both fl's. Outside of these, I doubt you will find too many lenses that will allow for ample movements. And if you do, often they have limited sharpness and also require ND center filters to compensate for light fall off. Which is another two stops of shutter speed lost. OTOH, 8x10 offers a lot of movements with a LOT of lenses.
Although buildings remain still, the tiniest bit of wind will still rock a big camera.... landscapes, well, they RARELY stay still... maybe for MF, but at these length exposures, you will start seeing shake that was not apparent when you were in the field.
I am not trying pursuade you or discourage you... if money is not much of an issue, of course, who cares if you make a mistake. For many people, when money is an issue, buying and selling gear and constantly starting from scratch can be quite frustrating. As remember, its not just the camera, its the holders, lenses, film, processing gear, etc. etc. Hence the comments.
But still, the biggest question you need to answer is, what is the end product, and what is the best means to get there. This assumes you don't want to use 11x14 for the sake of using 11x14, which is OK by me! It's always best to backtrack your needs, assuming the end product is the goal and not the camera.
I know one LF photographer who uses a massive camera (don't want to give the format, or I might give his identity away) Anyway, when talking to him once, I discovered, he was very aware of the fact better images can be made with a smaller format, for several reasons and all this weight and size was a burdened not welcomed..... but it was the mystique of the camera that people were intrigued with, and he capitalizes off THAT, and it got him lots of business!. So you may want to consider this also :-)
The class is a great idea if you never toyed with LF gear.... when I started, I used to think of the differences between the formats, 4x5...... 11x14 were small, so whats the big deal...but after years of shooting, you learn, there is a HUGE difference between most single format jumps, let alone a triple jump to 11x14. The difference between a compact 8x10 and 11x14 by itelf is usually quite compelling... But you must weigh this against how often you plan to shoot it, how well will it meet your criteria, etc. Horses for courses!
That's the essence of it. There's no point arguing to the death over all the different technical issues we've raised, because what's really going on is that we're applying wildly different "filters" to judge what makes a format a reasonable choice for a user.
I think we've clearly made the point that the logistical burdens become disproportionately larger as you move past 8x10; again, my own advice was that 8x10 is a more practical starting point. But that having been established, I have no idea where Alex will come down once he's gained more experience - whether deep down inside he would be frustrated by a kit which doesn't have the plenitude of options, the extreme technical versatility and the easy handling upon which you place so much weight; whether what's special about big negatives is precisely the point - which is what resonates with me; or whether some entirely different criteria are what really matters, with the optimal match to that being something neither of us would choose for ourselves. It will be up to him to decide.
Last edited by Oren Grad; 23-Jun-2006 at 22:14.
Oren, agreed..... but often, the allure of a bigger negative tricks the uninformed into a painful and expensive experience, hence everyones contributions here....this forum has rescued many :-)
As a side note, I once viewed a 20x24 contact print, I always dreamed of seeing one.... what I saw was a mediocre B&W image landscape image..... IMO, a good 6x6 shot enlarged would have been preferable to this contact print. After discussions, we concluded there is rarely a single shortcoming that causes less than stellar results..... it can be a combination of issues...in this case, older glass (how many modern lenses cover 20x24), very high f stop, f128 I beleive, LONG exposure, camera shake, subject shake, film alignment, film buckle, etc etc.
I'm listening..... the part about movements is really important to me. In NYC you cant step back 10000 feet from the skyscraper (well, you could, but you may find yourself in NJ, and that's bad) so often the camera is going to be pointed up... which means a lot of correction is going to be needed. It sounds like if I got the brand new Schneider ULF lens and put it on an 8x10 I'd be fine.
The plan was, of course for 11x14 contact prints. Regular silver and alternative processes. I have a fascination with albumen prints, and there's a bunch of others I want to try too. But I've always liked the look of contact prints, and the notion of not really being able to do much about mistakes on them is somehow refreshingly honest to me in the digital craze. You spend and hour or three fiddling and setting up the shot. You take the shot. You fiddle with the neg some more to develop it just right. And you contact print it. I suppose you can spot the print, but there's something about being able to show a photograph and say it was unedited or massaged. It's RAW art, if you will. As for 11x14, I've always found the size perfect. Enough so that I have a mat cutter that only cuts mats as large as 16x20. And lastly, yes, an 11x14 with a 48" extension is like a giant middle finger in the face of digital. Perhaps I will find 8x10 just as good over time.
Hehehehe, if I can find a place to rent a large format camera, I'll ditch the course. =)
--A
Take the course, get some "chops" with a 4x5. Learn the movements, mechanics, and workflow of LF. If you need to buy a 4x5 get something cheap like an old Calumet 400C series. Not the most protable but built like a tank and with full movements. They are on ebay for about $150 all the time.
If you still want to go the 11x14 route, then come back and get some specific ideas on cameras available and what your options are for lenses in different price ranges. One thing about the 11x14, with the growing interest in ULF you wil not lose any money on the purhcase as it will be pretty easy to re-sell the camera for what you pay for it.
Alec... seems like you are honing down on your needs. If 11x14 contact prints are what you desire, and you want some big movements for architecural.... a good 11x14 camera with ample range of movements and the new schneider Fine Art lenses will be a unique fit for your needs. Two things to consider... be sure the camera has sufficent movements to meet your needs, as many 11x14 cameras may not have the full compliment of movements to take advantage of what you crave for archeticural, but 8x10 with fine art lenses and I am willing to bet you can acheive your goals.
The other thing to consider is ND center filters, as the light falloff when using movements can be extreme, and if you are making contact prints, you have less chance of accurate correction vs. Photoshop (sorry, I had to mention it)
If your shooting exteriors, then DOF is not much of an issue...so IMO, the 11x14 is a good fit for what you describe. Since just about everything can be rented in NYC, why not try a rental... although not sure if anyone rents those new lenses yet, but I would not doubt someone has them. FYI.... Kieth Canham is now taking orders for 20x24 cameras ready by 2008, just in case you get the bug :-)
Best of luck, keep us posted on your progress.... a future post to this thread will bump it forward to the top of the list, so we will all find it. For what its worth, I went from 35mm to 8x10 with no classes, no instructors, no mentors, just one book and a bit of fiddling, and my first outing produced wonderful images. I enjoyed the transition, but like you, I was well versed in photography. I have never looked back. I too considered 11x14 quite often, but I shoot color and the film was drying up.... but as Oren mentioned, most any film can be had for $10k special order, a bit more then what I would need.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks