Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 57

Thread: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    316

    Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    It pains me to sell my Tech Master. I thought I sold it once but the buyer backed out. I'm trying again. And right after I had a first winning bidder on the Master, I bought a Tech V from a local used camera store, out of seller's regret. Fortunately they took it back and refunded my money when I told them that the sale of the Master fell through.

    A couple years ago, I sold all my 4x5 lenses, except for a couple.

    I've only shot the camera a couple times in the last 2 years. Is that the biggest sign - the low usage means I'm not an LF shooter?

    I mostly shoot 35mm, and medium format.

    For those that got out of LF, what was the sign for you, that LF wasn't for you?

    ....Vick

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    9,599

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    A camera is a tool, not club. Generally, you'll do your best (or at least come away more satisfied with how you've spent your time) when working with the tools which give you the most pleasure.
    I'm not sure usage is a good indicator.
    A fly fisherman may only get on a stream a few times a year. A private pilot may actually log only 30 or 40 hours a year. A commercial photographer likely spends the bulk of his time shooting digital cameras and only gets to play with the big ones for his personal use.
    That dosen't mean the fisherman or pilot or commercial photographer isn't a real fisherman, pilot, or large format photographer, does it?
    Call yourself a photographer and call it good
    "I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 1997
    Location
    Baraboo, Wisconsin
    Posts
    7,697

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    I almost never used my LF camera the first year or so after I bought it. Part of the reason for me was that I didn't like the particular camera I bought for my first camera (a somewhat heavy, complex camera). After I replaced it with a lighter, simpler LF camera that I found easier to set up, take down, and carry around I started using that camera occasionally. And as I used it more I became more comfortable with it, which led to using it even more, etc. etc. So if there are things you don't like about your particular camera you could always try replacing it with one that doesn't have the problems you find with your present camera.

    OTOH, if you just don't like the whole process of LF photography (loading film, carrying the camera around, using movements, etc.) then I'd suggest just forgetting about LF and stick with what you like. Despite what some here seem to think, using a LF camera isn't a badge of honor or some great achievement that only a select few can attain. Anybody can use a large format camera. The trick is making excellent photographs regardless of the format used to make them.
    Brian Ellis
    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
    a mile away and you'll have their shoes.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Barcelona/Spain
    Posts
    1,403

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    I've been getting signs to go off photography altogether lately. In fact I was thinking about this for the past month.
    It seems like whenever I stop to photograph something, people and vehicles seem to show up in my scene all of a sudden. Problems I had never experienced before start ruining my photos. A light leak here, a dark slide that slips down blocking part of the negative there... developing problems... quite depressing I have to say.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vick Ko View Post
    Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    It pains me to sell my Tech Master. I thought I sold it once but the buyer backed out. I'm trying again. And right after I had a first winning bidder on the Master, I bought a Tech V from a local used camera store, out of seller's regret. Fortunately they took it back and refunded my money when I told them that the sale of the Master fell through.

    A couple years ago, I sold all my 4x5 lenses, except for a couple.

    I've only shot the camera a couple times in the last 2 years. Is that the biggest sign - the low usage means I'm not an LF shooter?

    I mostly shoot 35mm, and medium format.

    For those that got out of LF, what was the sign for you, that LF wasn't for you?

    ....Vick
    If you like to make images that only a large negative and movements can accomplish, then you use a large negative and a camera with movements. There is no such thing as a "large format photographer", there are however photographers who use large format cameras because that is the tool that allows them to make the photographs they like making. If you identify yourelf as "a large format photographer" then there is a possibility that another agenda is at work, whether you realise it or not.
    One man's Mede is another man's Persian.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pacifica, CA
    Posts
    1,710

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    Hi Vick,

    I most value a crisp looking scenic on 11x14. 35mm rarely delivers it but when everything falls in place it comes close with a little softness, 6x9 has delivered it on occasion but lately it too has softness. 4x5 always, always comes through.

    I took a recent hiatus and shot 35mm and 120, so recently reconfirmed my feelings on this...

    Because it delivers the look, easily, I remain committed to 4x5 black and white.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    1,376

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    Last time I quit..it was because a pee stick had an X



    so I sold all my stuff.


    I've slowly been trying to get back - most based upon a concept of taking portraits with a Linhof Tech 5x7

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    316

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    Ha ha ha ha

    The first pee stick put an end to my darkroom. That room became my older boy's bedroom.
    The second one came almost 2 years ago. Lots of digi-PS for him, but no LF portraits.

    Yeah, I understand.

    Vick



    Quote Originally Posted by DrTang View Post
    Last time I quit..it was because a pee stick had an X

    so I sold all my stuff.


    I've slowly been trying to get back - most based upon a concept of taking portraits with a Linhof Tech 5x7

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    1,837

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    Try a lightweight 4x5 with Graflok back and a 6x12cm RFH.

  10. #10
    Format Omnivore Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 1999
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Posts
    2,997

    Re: Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

    "How do you know you need to piss?" No, I don't remember what famous painter said that when he was asked by a novice about being an artist. You need it because you really do need it!

    I took up large format cameras because a box camera (SLR) could not do what I needed to be done. I wanted more of a scene in focus, and the only device that gives me that is the large format camera. Nothing else. Movements are king. And that large negative? Icing on the cake. The camera is just a much of a paintbrush as is a lens.

    Vick, you picked up a LF camera for a reason. What it gear acquisition syndrome? Was it, "_____ used one of these, so me too?"

    I think that what you've done that holds you back the most is that you are putting a label on yourself. No more labels! You photograph. To paraphrase Deepak Chopra, "You are a human, photographing."
    "It's the way to educate your eyes. Stare. Pry, listen, eavesdrop. Die knowing something. You are not here long." - Walker Evans

Similar Threads

  1. How do you sign your prints?
    By Milton Tierney in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 21-Feb-2010, 09:44
  2. Where do you sign your prints?
    By Nate Battles in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 4-Oct-2007, 09:42
  3. sign of the times
    By John Kasaian in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 29-Aug-2007, 08:26
  4. A sign of the times...
    By William Leviit in forum Announcements
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 16-Oct-2000, 02:02

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •