Who is using LF commercially?

[Daniele Minetto]

OK, here's a perspective from a Print Production Manager:

A majority of the work I do is catalog and direct mail. Lots and lots of product shots. But I also produce occasional coffee table books, reference books, and fine art prints. All of these require images, and whether it’s a series of toilet seats I’m selling, or a coffee table book on the history of a certain horse breeding society, they all require the images to be digital for efficient and cost effective reproduction. So, I'm rarely concerned with the camera that's being used, but I am concerned with the format the image is delivered in. From a print production perspective, files must be digital. I don't really care if you shoot film (35mm, MF or LF) and scan and process, or shoot raw digital and process. What I do care about is getting the images I need [i.e., product images] in the format I need [color-correct CMYK TIFFs], within the budget [$$$] and schedule [tick-tock, tick-tock] I need.

In today’s budget tight, time crunched world, getting film is not an option for me. The resources to scan, process, and provide files for me are becoming scarcer, and hence more costly, and don’t generally fit any production schedule I work with. And photogs that shoot film usually cannot meet the schedules I need, because they encounter the same issues I do. Even my fine art print work is done digitally, though I do have a resource that utilizes a 4x5 Cambo and digital back (for those really really large pieces of art).

So this is not to say that LF doesn’t have a place in commercial work, but for a majority of the commercial work being done, LF isn’t the best choice.

My dos centavos…


Brian

Dear Brian,
I clearly understand you're interested in images ( that's what you need ) but I'm first interested in photography.... no tick-tock tick-tock, but I must admit I'm not a commercial photographer ( unfortunately? )

Daniele Minetto

[Henry Ambrose]

Its been three years for me since I shot any film for money. I do not know of anyone who wants film to scan rather than digital files. I miss using my 4x5 but the medium of choice is a file (as bvstaples wrote). For commercial work, producing anything else is pointless and a huge disadvantage.

[David E. Rose]

I have shot three projects over the last two years with 4x5 film and scanned the results. The work was done for two architect clients that still believed that 4x5 was the way to go. It was enjoyable for me, but a reminder of the challenges of mixed light sources when working with film. I have shot digital for both architects since, and both seem satisfied. I wonder if I will ever shoot 4x5 for an architect again?

[Kirk Gittings]

In the last maybe 2 years, I've had two architects suggest I shoot 4x5 film, one from Boston and one from San Francisco. In both bases I talked them out of it, shot a DSLR, and they were thrilled with the results. I would find film very limiting at this point.

[lecarp]

Here is one, with video. Apparently John is doing some commercial work again.http://www.miracleworkeronbroadway.com/dugdale.php

[Rick Tardiff]

Here is one, with video. Apparently John is doing some commercial work again.http://www.miracleworkeronbroadway.com/dugdale.php

thanks for sharing this, its wonderful. What an inspiration..

[Frank Petronio]

Back in the day, I once had a S@atchi and Sa@tchi art director insist that digital files delivered on SyQuest rendered "smoother" than files from CD-Rs. Probably something to do with thinking a big SyQuest platter (the old 44/88 mb size) was like a vinyl record?

(He's now a CD!)

Honestly I don't get that much work but what I do is because of my work, not because of the camera I use. If somebody crawls up my butt interrogating my equipment choices then it turns me off and I know they're the hacks.

[Dirk Rösler]

In the old days LF meant high res images and perspectively well-controlled images. LF also meant using film. The old days are gone though and the client or editor doesn't really care as long she receives that high quality image. You'd be a fool to disagree, at least commercially.

The challenge to the LF photographer is to show that there is more to LF than the classical properties. I believe so, but perhaps these aspects are not valued commercially.

[r.e.]

Here is one, with video. Apparently John is doing some commercial work again.http://www.miracleworkeronbroadway.com/dugdale.php

That is remarkable, just plain inspirational.

His web site: http://www.johndugdale.net/

[mdd99]

That is remarkable, just plain inspirational.

His web site: http://www.johndugdale.net/

Put another way, this whole topic goes from hopeless to hopeful.