Not sure R.E, I think he provides context of a march together with the other person in the background, the fact that the others are out of focus gives a good context without being distracting. My point is that those two out of focus people are enough to provide background context while the whole photo as it is provides a story. The original photo has far more context than subject and hence is very dilluted.
The reason I raised the question about the rationale for using 4x5 for street photography is that in my own work, I suppose the tradition would be to shoot it with a smaller format as well... I mean most fashion-beauty-environmental portrait type photographers tend to go for an RB-67 or something like that. So I'm asking myself why I am bothering with 4x5 too?
I don't usually make huge prints, but I've made 40x60s from P3200 35mm, so I am not exactly overly concerned about getting the last drop of resolution out of my images... And when I used a Rollei TLR I shot a lot of portraits wide open at f/2.8 and they seem to have just as much separation and nice bokeh as any large format lens used wide open too... so using large format isn't really out of technical or print quality concerns. (And I've seen plenty of wonderful large high quality prints from smaller format stuff anyway.)
For me it comes down to the subjects response to the big camera. It was even more so when I used 8x10 before I dropped down to 4x5 for practical reasons (expense, airline travel, etc.) Once I set down the little digital dslr that I use to "warm up" or figure out the shot, it seems like my subjects really do react differently to the large camera. And I like how they react. I might only do a few sheets of any one set-up, but usually those few sheets tend to capture the best expressions and moments -- far better than when I am rapid-firing dozens and hundreds of shots with the little digital.
(I like a lot of the digital shots too though, they do tend to compliment each other but they really different mediums, like watercolors are to oil paintings.)
So... OK, street photography with a 4x5. If the people aren't aware of the camera, and you're compromising the technical aspects that might make the large format shot somehow superior, then what are you left with?
It is a nice technical skill and great practice -- kudos to Ash for that -- but I just don't see it as a working methodolgy that has "legs". I'm not so sure Ash thought like that either, I am just pointing out that I find the idea of large format street photographing lacking once I really investigate it.
Now for walking around Florence, like an earlier thread was asking about, I think that handheld Razzle and a bunch of Grafmatics would be the bomb... having that extra 30 seconds to compose the shot would make all the difference in the world.
And David Burnett, using his Aero-Ektar and Speed Graphic amongst the throngs of photojournalists using dSLRs... well I think when Al Gore looked over he noticed Burnett and his Speed Graphic as a stand out, and human nature* being what it is, he responded to Burnett's antique Speed more than to all the interchangable generic cameras... which made for some interesting shots. And the Aero, shot wide open, looks unlike anything else too.
(*if Al Gore is indeed human?)
The camera does not matter,
take a look at weegee,
this kind of photography needs
a lot of experience, a complete
mastering of the camera, and a
vision.
from the a learning point of view curve,
this is a good start.
but there is a lot to be learned if Ash wants
to make a living in photography with this kind of pictures,
I think that is what Frank is referring too, and I have
to agree. So go out with whatever camera Ash, and
show us some more, I would like to see you improve
your work!
regards
stefan
... that is unless you consider the man in the left witness to the scene and witness to the observer to the scene which in my mind is a worthy element that adds spice and need not be removed.Originally Posted by r.e.
150mm on a 4x5, 80mm on a 6x7 what's the difference they're both "normal" lenses. You will get the same ratio of negative relegated to the trash bin with either format.But we are back at Frank's question. The film has been pushed to ISO 800 (and in my view some of those shots should have been made at an aperture that would require a push to ISO 1600 or 3200), and your crop relegates at least 50% of this particular negative to the trash bin.
The question is, as Frank says, what is the objective? With a Mamiya 7II and an 80mm lens, one would have more freedom to move and more flexibility in composition for this shot. Furthermore, if one desired, one could shoot at ISO 125 or 400. The negative, given the extensive crop of Ash's photo, would enlarge just as well. I'm not trashing 4x5, especially since I'm thinking of trying it, but there is some point to understanding the limitations and having an objective that makes it sensible to accept those limitations.
Most certainly a high end digital SLR would be the most convenient system for this work but the Razzle is what the artist had at his disposal and as we all know most artists are highly underpaid. If Ash had used a 35mm or a Mamiya he would have not been able to post these images here due to forum regulations:
See #6 in this thread http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=30016
As it stands I think Ash has some nice images that if further edited for publication would stand up well.
I certainly get Frank's take and agree. If fast moving action is required as in a portrait or fashion session LF is not exactly the most covenient format. If indeed there is plenty of time to setup for the page spread or front cover that's another story.
Personally I think pointing a camera at someone is a ballsy thing to do unless they have fully subscribed to the event. At a protest the photographer can be more acceptable as protesters typically want their cause to be well publicized.
Hi Jetcode,
Maybe I wasn't being clear enough. If I were shooting this with a Mamiya/80, I would be much closer to the subjects. It would be a fairly easy matter to fill the frame with the image shown in Ben's crop. I could shoot with ISO 125 film or up, maybe with ISO 50. I could shoot from 1/60 sec, because the lens has a leaf shutter, to 1/500th. I could shoot anywhere from f4 to f22. If I had a full roll, I would have 10 shots, and you can be assured, if that woman is related to one of the men who was the subject of the demonstration, I would have worked at it until I got it right. Right means that you don't have a guy staring at the camera and, with a little effort, you don't have a woman blocking the foreground. It also means that you vary your angle, maybe try something with your knees bent real low. If I can't get close? That's when my M3 with a 90mm lens comes in real handy.
I don't know why you think that a high-end digital SLR is "most certainly" the most convenient system for street work. While I own a pretty good DSLR, for street photography I much prefer a Leica M3 and/or Mamiya 7, a couple of lenses, and a handheld light meter in incident mode. For whatever reason, I like how that setup affects my rhythm. It keeps everything really simple, using film instead of an 8GB flash card makes me think, and reloading film gives me time to think
Hey, if you and Ben think that the composition of Ash's photograph is helped by having half a head on the edge of the frame, it only goes to show that tastes differ. Myself, either he's in, or he's gone. The deep meaning that you ascribe to half a head eludes me
Frank,
I think that there is something to your comment on Burnett, and I am intrigued by this idea that a large format camera, in some circumstances, has a positive impact on the result. Apparently, we are now at a point where any film camera has an impact. In August, I photographed an outdoor concert with an M3 and a Mamiya around my neck, and it not only attracted notice, including from other photographers, but I believe gave me more freedom of movement in the stage area than I would have had otherwise.
Stefan,
I agree, look at Weegee, aka Arthur Fellig, to whom I referred in my earlier post. His approach to handheld 4x5 shooting is instructive, especially his choice of aperture, shutter speed and regular use of flash.
Cheers.
Ah but Weegee shot tons of film, cropped like crazy, using flash at f/16-22, he did really meatball tactics to get the thing in focus. It was standard operating procedure in the days before smaller formats took over, I think thousands of other press photographers did the same things. What Weegee did different was that he seemed to care about the gore and the subject matter enough to realize that he was an artist. (Which is why he did all those awful double exposures late in his life when he was trying to be a "real" artist.)
Of course a photograph can say multiple things at once rather than just expressing a specific though or emotion (if a photograph can actually "say" anything significant at all that is). In which case, a simplistic graphic form of composition directing our eyes to a single element is a mistake. Having "the eye bounces backwards and forwards without settling anywhere" can often be a good thing.
You'd be amazed how small the demand is for pictures of trees... - Fred Astaire to Audrey Hepburn
www.photo-muse.blogspot.com blog
I agree that there can be a picture within a picture but I would have to disagree with a photo not having to have a specific aim or purpose in its composition.
just talking of "a" picture within "a" picture seems to reduce photographs to very simplistic things. Some (and some of the best) can be almost infinitely complex with multiple layers, focii and levels of potential meaning.
And as an aside, taking a photograph standing alone, how do we know what is the specific aim and/or purpose in it's composition?
What, I wonder, was the specific aim or purpose in composition of this fairly well known photograph for example?:
or even this
You'd be amazed how small the demand is for pictures of trees... - Fred Astaire to Audrey Hepburn
www.photo-muse.blogspot.com blog
The smaller the camera the less intimidating to the photographed yet for close up work you still have to get close regardless of format. I suspect that a 20x24 would generate instant fright of being gobbled up by the funny green men that carry these huge film holders around. I had a Mamiya 645, a Fuji 6x7, and Fuji 645. Most convenient yet nothing like my 5D and say a 50mm and 85mm and a couple of 2G cards. Fast, meaning no film to process, histograms, etc.
I think the subject of the protest is of african decent. The woman appears to be caucasion. They very well could be related but not genetically as far as I can tell.
Most definitely tastes are different and without that the world would indeed be bland.Hey, if you and Ben think that the composition of Ash's photograph is helped by having half a head on the edge of the frame, it only goes to show that tastes differ. Myself, either he's in, or he's gone. The deep meaning that you ascribe to half a head eludes me
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks