Quality 8x10 gear...how much does it matter?

[John Kasaian]

I've not had any noticable problems from film buckling when contact printing but I can see where that would be a big problem with enlargements. It does seem to happen more while shooting in very cold weather. I didn't mean to imply Burkett's gear was third rate, only the equipment I've seen appears to be professional quality from an earlier time---he might have moved up to spankin' new glass and cameras (he could certainly afford to) but in all the photos i've seen he's still using what appears to be "classic" gear.

[Daniel Stone]

I asked him(Burkett) about his lenses and choice of such when talking with him last year on the phone, he uses the following lenses(and maybe some more, IDK exactly):

150XL
210XL
240 Sironar-S
300 Sironar-S
360 Sironar-S
450 Nikkor-M
600 Fujinon-C
800 APO Tele-Xenar HM(gray barrel, 1st generation)

and occasionally(with a supplementary 2nd tripod on the front to support the standard, a 1200T Nikkor)

so modern glass. He can afford it . But they're just tools, but he's used LOTS(his words exactly) of lenses over the years, process lenses such as Artars, Ronars, etc... But the above lenses are his staple lenses now.

And that's just the capture stage, then he's got the APO EL-Nikkor 480mm to enlarge his 8x10's with.

I've seen his Ilfochromes 1st hand, and they're utterly breathtaking!

-Dan

[Frank Petronio]

Now I just have to convince myself that my Caltar-S II 300 is sufficient....and im sure it is, but can anyone confirm which lens this actually is? Is it a Schneider Symmar S MC? Because according to certain charts the Caltar has an IC of 420 and the Schneider has an IC of 411. Or am i missing something? Which is quite possible.

You're talking about 9mm for a subjective measure at best. For all we know they cheat or measure the circles differently between manufacturers... and it gaining 9mm worth the price difference of $1500 or so for a 300 Sironar-S?

Also I don't tape my film unless I am shooting down like that.

It seems like you're really anxious about this. No matter how much comfort we give you, you either need to go out and buy the fancy stuff and compare results -- or learn how to live with not having the absolute pinnacle of gear.

What kind of car do drive, what kind of house do you own? Can you deal with the fact it's not a Buggatti or that you don't have a mansion in Newport? Same with cameras.....

[Tony Karnezis]

Guilty and quite a bit

Homage to Ruth Bernhard.

[Ben Syverson]

Film bowing? I'll believe it when I see it (and measure it). I've shot a fair bit of 8x10, and loading a dud sheet into a holder, I see no significant problem, even tilted 90°. It's telling that no public test has ever demonstrated the necessity of vacuum holders.

I believe vacuum holders are predatory products preying on people with OCD.

[Jim Graves]

Wow ... it's amazing that Adams and Weston were ever able to get a decent print!

[Tony Karnezis]

Hacks. Weston's negatives were so bad that he never bothered to enlarge them.

[Tony Karnezis]

Film bowing? I'll believe it when I see it (and measure it). I've shot a fair bit of 8x10, and loading a dud sheet into a holder, I see no significant problem, even tilted 90°. It's telling that no public test has ever demonstrated the necessity of vacuum holders.

I believe vacuum holders are predatory products preying on people with OCD.

Can anyone provide scans from regular vs. taped film or a vacuum holder +/- the vacuum applied to illustrate the problem of film bowing and the effectiveness of each solution?

[Jim Graves]

Hacks. Weston's negatives were so bad that he never bothered to enlarge them.

Yep ... both Ansel and Weston used the wooden Century Universal camera that Weston complained was not rigid enough ... he built a brace for the front standard when long extension was needed ... and Weston used the Turner-Reich 12" triple convertible lens for his year-long photo shoot throughout California ... made 1200 8x10 negatives that year (1937-38) ... probably none that were sharp, though.

[Cor]

I can see a potential problem with film bowing when one uses lith film as in camera film. The lith film I used (APHS lith from Freestyle) is so much thinner and flimsier than the regular (B&W) stock, that I sometimes worried about it, but I only contact print my 8*10 negatives, no problem with resolution of Lith film, but boy is that film a dust magnet!

I guess that is one of the reasons why these mentioned copy camera's had vacuum backs.

best,

Cor