Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57

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

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Seattle, Washington
    Posts
    3,020

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

    I'm still searching. I recently traded my Deardorff V8 for a Sinar P kit. I lived quite happily with the V8 for several years, but recently, having made many changes in my life, I feel the need for stability and precision. I want to work in a controlled, studio environment, on project - based work. This is all 180 degrees from everything I've ever done. If you don't feel your tools fit, changing them might improve your work.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Portland, OR USA
    Posts
    747

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

    I went on view camera hiatus for several years while my children were young. I've come back to using them in the past 5 years because I have more time, and I'm involved with a group that gets me out to photograph once a month. I still use my MF cameras, but for some situations, a view camera is just the better tool.

    Peter Gomena

  3. #13
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,370

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

    A) Was there a sign for you that you were a LF photographer?

    • After viewing an informal personal "portfolio" of my existing work, a very well known and regarded LF photographer commented that I "had pushed medium format as far as it could go", further suggesting if normal view cameras were insufficient, I should give 11X14 a try.


    B) Was there a sign for you that you weren't a LF photographer?

    • Looking at and digesting those signs a lot over the past few years: the X-Rays of my abused arthritic knees.

  4. #14
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,370

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    I was using my only camera (Rolleiflex) like a view camera -- on a pod, on f/22, on "B", taking landscapes.
    That pretty much happened with me to, using the MF as if it were a view camera.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    8,476

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

    "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."

    "The trick is making excellent photographs regardless of the format used to make them."

    To those superb answers I would add: It can be fun to switch from one kind of equipment to another. It can also be instructive. Each approach tends to improve the other.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    99

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

    A few years ago I stopped to photograph an abandoned farm house. The only camera I had with me was my Mamiya 7 II, a camera that I absolutely love. I was shooting it on a tripod, using slow film, all the things necessary to maximize quality. The distant shots were fine. Nevertheless, when I moved in close, I kept getting frustrated because the Mamiya does not have movements. I would set up the camera, look at the scene and think how I could make it better if I could just use a little front rise or fall. If I had my view camera and the ability to shift, I could square that doorway and the window behind it. After a short while, I gave up with the Mamiya and drove into town to get my view camera. For me, I had learned to see in terms of using a view camera and the creative possibilities offered by using movements. Not having them frustrated me. I now keep my view camera with me in the car.

  7. #17

    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 Ken Lee View Post
    "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."

    "The trick is making excellent photographs regardless of the format used to make them."

    To those superb answers I would add: It can be fun to switch from one kind of equipment to another. It can also be instructive. Each approach tends to improve the other.
    I didn't realise just what a superb job 35mm does until I started using 4x5 and 8x10.
    One man's Mede is another man's Persian.

  8. #18

    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. #19
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    9,206

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

    While I understand what is meant, if there is no such thing as a large format photographer, then in follows that there is no such thing as a photographer. They are just labels.
    I am a large format photographer who just developed 18 rolls of 120 film...

  10. #20

    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 Vaughn View Post
    While I understand what is meant, if there is no such thing as a large format photographer, then in follows that there is no such thing as a photographer. They are just labels.
    I am a large format photographer who just developed 18 rolls of 120 film...
    "They are just labels..." That's my point. "I'm a large format photographer"... what does that mean? Do you take pictures of large formats? "Photographer" isn't a label, but a description the same as "watchmaker" or "surgeon". What I mean is that a photographer uses light to make images. The specific eguipment is subject to the type of images one wishes to make.

    When did you ever hear someone say they were a 35mm photographer? Or - God forbid - a small format photographer?
    One man's Mede is another man's Persian.

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
  •