I am considering it
I am considering it
I don't know why people prefer plastic holders--maybe it's just something about the romance of plastic. :-) The specs are the same if you buy ones that aren't prehistoric, and you can get GREAT deals. They weigh less than plastic, and they wear better. I've got all wood, and every one is near brand new. Most of them cost me around $20-25 each. Try that with plastic.
Thanks, but I'd rather just watch:
Large format: http://flickr.com/michaeldarnton
Mostly 35mm: http://flickr.com/mdarnton
You want digital, color, etc?: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradofear
And plastic attracts dust far more than wood...
I like wood too. But wood becomes unglued, can warp, and generates dust from deterioration. Try that with plastic!
Garrett
flickr galleries
We've got humidity here for the warmer months. So plastic makes good sense for me. When wooden holders are humid, the darkslides get too tight.
The linked one for sale would be good. B&J has good options; monorail or rembrandt. C1 is good. I don't know if the 8x10's are this way, but Sinar 4x5's are dirt cheap. OLD kodak/century cameras are pretty affordable too and made for the studio, but won't have tripod screws; made for stands with tables.
Oh yeah, add the too tight darkslide problem. And since I wetplate with a lot of my cameras, and silver nitrate stains wood, plastic is better there too.
Garrett
flickr galleries
Bookmarks