Approaching the Large Format Pano Scene

[Vaughn]

I use a darkslide that I have cut almost in half. I get two 3.5x10 images per sheet of 8x10 film. I have enough front rise that I can raise the lens so that it is centered within the 3.5x10 negative area. If I want to get two identical images on the one sheet (but perhaps different exposures for each), I just remove the back and rotate it 180 degrees for the second shot.

Not quite as convientent as an actual 4x10 camera, but as long as one does not forget which side (and half of the side) one has already exposed, and don't forget to put the full darkslide in after removing the half dark slide, it works fine. I have to admit that I have double exposed images and totally fogged sheets of film to prove it is easy to get a little confused when one is a bit rushed.

Basically, one gets two cameras/formats for the price and weight of a darkslide. Plus, it probably cost as much to have one 4x10 E6'ed as it does an 8x10 with two 4x10 images on it.

Vaughn

Edited to add -- Since I can center the lens on either the upper or lower halves of the 8x10, I do have front swing and tilt on the optical center of the lens (Zone VI 8x10).

[Ole Tjugen]

I've been toying with the idea of sticking half a roll of 120 film to a black metal plate, and shooting that in my 24x30cm camera. With a 150mm superwide lens, that would be quite a 6x30 panorama!

[Brian Vuillemenot]

I've been toying with the idea of sticking half a roll of 120 film to a black metal plate, and shooting that in my 24x30cm camera. With a 150mm superwide lens, that would be quite a 6x30 panorama!

Why not put in a roll of 35mm, Ole, for an even longer panorama?

[Ole Tjugen]

Why not put in a roll of 35mm, Ole, for an even longer panorama?

If I did that, I might as well stitch together a bunch of 35mm shots. Medium format rollfilm is about as narrow as I would care to go.

Besides - with a 150mm lens, anything narrower than 6cm won't fit the horizon line where I'm planning to use it - it's nowhere near flat!

[Vick Vickery]

I sometimes use a darkslide that has been cut in half to make a slide that covers 2" x 5", 2 on a sheet when you reverse the position of the 1/2 slide (actually I cut it a little more than 1/2 way so it leaves a small border between the 2 sections on 1 4x5 sheet) and it does pretty good considering that the slide came out of an old used-up holder, so cost me nothing.

[JW Dewdney]

Hmmm... this thread seems strangely familiar - didn't we deal with it somewhere else? I thought I contributed. Anyway - I found a great way to do the half-film holder thing WAY back when - which is to tape a mask (I used exposed and processed lith film IIRC) taped to the film holder, just in front of the slide. Just mark off half the GG (lower or upper - as you wish) and then make an exposure and tape to the other half. It requires a basic memory as you're doing it - but is probably the easiest way.

[Asher Kelman]

So the sense is to go for an 8x10 that can have at at least 4" of front raise, maybe just a little more so one has a 4x10 with split slides.

So which 8x10 would you choose for field use?

Asher

[Jack Flesher]

So which 8x10 would you choose for field use?

There are lots of options here, depending on budget and specific needs. Given that you want 2" (50mm) of net rise AND of net fall (keep in mind you also need 2" of net FALL to accomodate framing when the split is at the bottom of the field)
to do 4x10 panos with a split slide, your options get reduced pretty quickly. You'll probably be looking for a camera with rear rise in addition to front rise and this lets several older models out. Lots of newer options available, but they are going to require deeper pockets

The one used camera in the sub $2000 price range I can think of that fits this specification nicely is an older Arca 8x10. It is a monorail, but due to the nature of the split rail it is very compact and convenient to carry when collapsed for field use. Almost any other 8x10 studio monorail will allow these movements and remain under the $2000 price-point, but most are too large to be easily packed and carried for field use.

Keep in mind an 8x10 camera with no rise at all will still allow you to crop a full 8x10 sheet to 4x10 after the fact, and the crop zone will allow for 2" rise or fall for after the fact framing. This approach also allows for a 5x10 or 6x10 or anything else after the fact that 4x10 won't. You will increase (double) your per-shot costs, but convenience is improved and your camera costs drop significantly, so it may be an acceptable option.

Cheers,

[Vaughn]

There are a couple ways to get around having insufficient rise/fall, yet still center the 4x10 neg with the lens.

If one has both front and back tilt, then it is just a matter of pointing the camera up and then making both standards perpenticular to the ground -- this is the equivilent to having front rise. Point the camera down and then making both standards perpenticular to the ground is equivilent to lowering the lens.

If one is making a second exposure of the exact same scene, then one can just rotate the camera back 180 degrees and always expose the "top" of the film holder. This keeps me from having to move the camera et al to compose and expose the second half of the neg. And it works if one does not have sufficient fall on the front.

Vaughn