What is Large Format Photography

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I agree that this forum should have the right to establish the parameters under which it operates. More succinctly, appropriately, and accurately I might add would be to rename this forum as "The View Camera and Film Forum...a subset of Apug"...although in this sense Apug, rather than being cloistered and unduly restrictive, in my opinion, is actually more liberal it would now appear.

You are way off base. Lets see, Jim Collum shoots a Betterlight back on a 4x5, Don Hutton I beleive stitches 4x5 photographs, Kirk Gittings, as he pointed out, stitches smaller format photographs but has the courtesy to limits his participation in this forum to LF photographs, Ken Lee uses 4x5 and scans, Sandy King frequently scans his LF negatives to make them even bigger or work on them, Michael Mutmansky scans a lot of his work. These are only a few that I know, I am sure there are plenty more who work with digital.

There is plenty of digital work and discussion in this forum including two dedicated digital forums, one for techniques and one for hardware. The only thing that is being ask of the members is that they have LF in common.

If you want to talk about what you do, lets do it. You have picked a very convinient comparison, yet I would like for you to show me any digital camera that can obtain the same quality I get with my 8x10 with one shot none of this stitching.

You want to talk about stitching and big files, I can do the same thing you do and get even bigger files. Choosing the proper focal lenght I can photograph sections of a scene, scan the 8x10 negatives and end up with a file in the gigabit range.

You want to talk about HDR, I can shoot a negative for the highlights and one for the shadows and blend them together, in the computer or darkroom.

You are way out of line accusing this forum of being a subset of APUG just because it does not wish to change it's focus and cater to the taste of a few members who insist on talking about dslrs.

[Alan Davenport]

Gee, I love these threads!

Q1: Why film only?
Q2: Why not digital?
Q3: Why not new definitions?
Q4: Why only the ground glass?
Q5: Why not the computer screen?
Q6: What exactly can be considered Large Format today?
Q7: Do we really want to find a good answer to the original question?
Q8: Why does size matter at all?
Q9: Why not use concept as a qualifier? (such as View Camera photography)

1. Because it's part of the definition. Even though I scan my large format films and end up with digital files, I can't call myself a digital photographer. Those who don't use film are, likewise, excluded from being Large Format Photographers.
2. See #1.
3. Why not new terms? Leave ours alone. Better yet, get a big ass camera and a box of film, and join us.
4. Groundglass is NOT required. It's about film size, and it's not our fault (collectively or individually) that most cameras for large format film, also have a groundglass viewing screen.
5. Great, if it uses film first.
6. Same as yesterday, and the day before: 4x5, and larger, film.
7. We've already found 8 pages of good answers to the original question. Unfortunately, some of us seem unwilling to accept answers that aren't what we want to hear.
8. Same as #1: it's in the definition.
9. Great concept! View camera photography is called "view camera photography," and it may or may not also be large format.


The problem is that some people are simply unwilling to accept that certain technical terms are fixed; unchanging; defined: such as "Large Format" when applied to photography. While these people may have marvelous photographic skills and mastery of the latest equipment and techniques, they lack the imagination to invent new terms to describe whatever it is they do.

Couple that with the je ne sais quoi of "large format" and some folks just can't resist trying to hijack the terminology.

Too bad: "Large format" means film, 4x5 or larger. Other than that, there are no restrictions on the type of camera, lenses (or lack thereof) or anything else; just use big sheets of film and you're a "large format" photographer.

If you don't use big sheets of film, you need to invent a new term. "Large format" is already taken.

[Andrew O'Neill]

!!!

[Kirk Gittings]

!!!

And that is their field outfit. You should see the studio camera!

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Gee, I love these threads!



1. Because it's part of the definition. Even though I scan my large format films and end up with digital files, I can't call myself a digital photographer. Those who don't use film are, likewise, excluded from being Large Format Photographers.
2. See #1.
3. Why not new terms? Leave ours alone. Better yet, get a big ass camera and a box of film, and join us.
4. Groundglass is NOT required. It's about film size, and it's not our fault (collectively or individually) that most cameras for large format film, also have a groundglass viewing screen.
5. Great, if it uses film first.
6. Same as yesterday, and the day before: 4x5, and larger, film.
7. We've already found 8 pages of good answers to the original question. Unfortunately, some of us seem unwilling to accept answers that aren't what we want to hear.
8. Same as #1: it's in the definition.
9. Great concept! View camera photography is called "view camera photography," and it may or may not also be large format.


The problem is that some people are simply unwilling to accept that certain technical terms are fixed; unchanging; defined: such as "Large Format" when applied to photography. While these people may have marvelous photographic skills and mastery of the latest equipment and techniques, they lack the imagination to invent new terms to describe whatever it is they do.

Couple that with the je ne sais quoi of "large format" and some folks just can't resist trying to hijack the terminology.

Too bad: "Large format" means film, 4x5 or larger. Other than that, there are no restrictions on the type of camera, lenses (or lack thereof) or anything else; just use big sheets of film and you're a "large format" photographer.

If you don't use big sheets of film, you need to invent a new term. "Large format" is already taken.

Thank you Alan! the only item I would change would be film or digital back for 4x5...

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

!!!

Those gigapixel guys, they just have to show off!

[Kirk Gittings]

Just curious, does anyone know how many grains of silver are in an average 4x5 sheet of film? Each one of those grains represents in digital terms a kind of sample.

[Greg Lockrey]

Just curious, does anyone know how many grains of silver are in an average 4x5 sheet of film? Each one of those grains represents in digital terms a kind of sample.

They measure from 1 to 2 microns if this helps.

On paper they measure .01 to .02 microns.

[Marko]

The problem is that some people are simply unwilling to accept that certain technical terms are fixed; unchanging; defined: such as "Large Format" when applied to photography. While these people may have marvelous photographic skills and mastery of the latest equipment and techniques, they lack the imagination to invent new terms to describe whatever it is they do.

Couple that with the je ne sais quoi of "large format" and some folks just can't resist trying to hijack the terminology.

Ah, I see now! You mean original like "Camera" and "Darkroom"? These terms surely weren't hijacked, or were they?

Yeah, these threads can indeed be funny at times, despite all the silliness.

[Don Hutton]

They measure from 1 to 2 microns if this helps.

And the pixels on the H3D are 6.8 microns across - pretty clunky in comparison