Now this is LARGE format

[Brian Schall]

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?sec...975&hpt=us_bn6

Wonder where he gets his film.

[Joanna Carter]

I may never be satisfied with 4x5 again

[Brian C. Miller]

Dennis Manarchy has been discussed in several threads on the forum. The most recent one was in the Lounge, asking if his camera is fake.

OK, the camera isn't fake. The film isn't fake. Very likely he has ponied up $15,000+ for a Kodak special order, and they filled it. But that's no problem for him, as a portrait session is $50,000.

Added: somebody take a look at the negatives. There's strips of lack of density on those, on either side of the subject. I can't tell if that's a display backlighting problem, or if it's a real problem on the negatives.

[EOTS]

Harhar, that's badass! :-)
Imagine doing the development & fixing at home *rotfl*!!!

[John Flavell]

Here's more info on the project and the proposed exhibit:

http://thefpac.org/

[Scott Walker]

Wow!
I want one

[Kirk Gittings]

So what do you gain over 8x10? Better definition of pores and zits? Its a gimmick.

[EOTS]

Yeah, I think anything over 8x10 is pretty overkill for those print sizes until film size equals print size, like wet plate etc...

But interesting nevertheless ...

And funny to think of 4x5 and 8x10 as compact cameras now ...
can't wait to see the Field version of the truck camera ;-)

[Ron McElroy]

What I don't understand about the project is the final enlarged print. How are they enlarged and more importantly why?

[Mike Anderson]

I don't get this:

What we're trying to do is capture this little essence of this country before it totally gets homogenized. Before everyone gets homogenized.

I think he just wanted to explore some extreme technology and needed some conceptual rationale to get the funding. Who's getting homogenized?