5x7: images and film

[Ken Lee]

Anyone who uses 5x7, can you show or direct me to some sample work ?

Also, where/who is a good source of 5x7 b&w film ? Is TMax 400 or Ilford FP4 available in 5x7 ? ?

[Ole Tjugen]

I use 5x7", mostly FP4.


http://www.bruraholo.no/tomler (http://www.bruraholo.no/tomler) is mostly 5x7", with some 9x12cm, 4x5" and 18x24cm thrown in.

[Gem Singer]

Hi Ken,

Scott Rosenberg and myself are presently comparing Ilford HP-5+, FP-4+, and T-Max 100. We are using Hp-5+ in 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10. We only have FP-4+ and T-Max 100 in the 4x5 size. However, that should not affect the results of the comparison, since We are only comparing the tonality of the various films. So far, the Ilford FP-4+ is showing signs of being the best choice, no matter which format we use.

Ilford Fp-4+, in 5x7, is available from several sources. I obtained mine from B&H, in New York. Also check out Arista brand, from Freestyle and the Photo Warehouse's 125 speed film. They are re-badged FP-4+. Check with Anthony at Fine Art Photo Supply. His film is FP-4+ and can be ordered in 5x7 at a lower cost than from most of the others

Look at Tuan's website to see a huge selection of 5x7 shots in color.

[Ben Calwell]

Badger Graphic is showing 5x7 TXP in stock on its web site, www.badgergraphic.com

[Jerry Flynn]

Paul Caponigro's work is mainly 5X7 (since the 1960's anyway.) He might be worth looking at. Just put his name in Google and you should get some hits with images. (If you add "-John" to your search criteria, Google will ignore topics concerning his son, John-Paul Caponigro.)

[James Bleifus]

Other places to check for film are Freestyle Photo and JandCphoto.com. I'm particularly fond of Efke film available from J and C.

Cheers,

James

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've just started using 5x7" recently, after shooting 8x10" and 4x5" for some years, and I've been shooting Arista.EDU 400 and J&C Classic 400 (depending on availability), which are both equivalent to FortePan 400. You can get Arista.EDU from freestylecamera.biz and you can get J&C Classic and Efke films in 5x7" from www.jandcphotography.com. Here are a couple of 5x7's I've made with technical info--


http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=1876&password=&sort=1&cat=500&page=1 (http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=1876&password=&sort=1&cat=500&page=1)


http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=1947&password=&sort=1&cat=500&page=1 (http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=1947&password=&sort=1&cat=500&page=1)

I think Steve Simmons is also a partisan of 5x7", and he's run a few articles on the format in _View Camera_ magazine.

My friend, Stephen Longmire, who photographs landscapes and occasionally pops into this forum shoots 5x7".

[David A. Goldfarb]

And how can I forget--the founder of this forum Quang-Tuan Luong shoots 5x7".

[Tracy Storer]

I've been shooting 5"x7" for a couple years. I've always used Tri-X. Still using stock of "old" Tri-X. I've always bought it from Calumet, not all the stores will stock it, but mail order and web should. I think Bergger has so far gone unmentioned, they do supply their BPF 200 in 5x7 as well as every other size I know of. (I use and like Bergger for my ULF work)
Hopefully soon, I'll get my image galleries (including 5"x7", 14"x17", and 20"x24" work) up on my personal site, (www.tracystorer.com)
5"x7" is a wonderful format....both for its' size and shape. (big enough to contact print in toothier alt. processes and in-between squareish 4x5/8x10 and the panoramic formats)
Tracy

[Scott Rosenberg]

just as a brief follow-up to eugene's response, i will attach a scan of a couple of identical shots taken with TMax 100 and FP4+. for this series of pictures, the negs were developed in ilford dd developer.

it's tough to see in these scans, but the fp4+ retains more detail in the highlights... this is most apparant when looking at the undersides of the flowers. the fp4+ also has a different look to it overall... it's a much more pleasing image, at least to my eye. it has a certain smoothness and luminousity that the tmax is lacking somehow. the under a loupe, tmax is definately finer grained, but that is not so much an issue when shooting in 4x5 or 5x7. the differences between the two are more pronounced than the scan reveals.

i don't know if this will help you at all, but since you guys were discussing such matters, i figured i'd weigh-in.

http://www.srosenberg.com/Website5/images/tmaxvfp4+.jpg

[David Richhart]

The early works of Lewis Hine were done on 5x7 glass plates. I will have to check, but I think he used a 5x7 RB Graflex... which is a large format SLR!

His documentary images are an important part of early 20th century American history. You may not recognize his name, but you have likely seen at least a few of his images. Well worth a look ,and an interesting man who documented the Ellis Island immigrants, child labor, and the craftsmen during the construction of the Empire State Building.

Just a couple websites to begin...


http://www.masters-of-photography.com/H/hine/hine.html (http://www.masters-of-photography.com/H/hine/hine.html)


http://www.geh.org/fm/lwhprints/htmlsrc2/hinekit_sld00004.html (http://www.geh.org/fm/lwhprints/htmlsrc2/hinekit_sld00004.html)

[Ken Lee]

Thanks to all for the info. I knew about QT's wonderful color work, but wanted to see the work of others as well.



I ask, because I just got a 5x7 Eastman #2D View Camera, and hope to restore it to working order.



http://www.kenleegallery.com/2d.jpg



Apparently, the red bellows indicates it was made during the 1930's . While not too obvious in the photo, it's a folder: just beneath the bellows, you can see the crack in the bed, where it folds up.

[steve simmons]

I like the proportions of 5x7 very much and, IMHO, they are big enough to contact print.

steve simmons

[pudge]

Nice to see other lovers of obselescent formats come out of the closet! I'm curious to know if those of you buying repackaged FP4 know how its shelf life compares with the stuff with the Ilford name on it (which is getting a bit hard to locate these days, though Ilford swears that will pass)? Now, if we want to talk about color films available in this size, we can really start to weep...

I decided years ago a 5x7 was the biggest camera I wanted to carry, and the smallest negative I could contact print. But it may be the shape that keeps me hunting fewer and fewer films from farther and farther away (Japan via Wisconsin these days!). 4x5, which I also use (God bless interchangeable Deardorff backs!), feels boxy by comparison, though sometimes it's the box I'm after. As a vacation from my usual format, I've been getting into another, even less popular size lately, if the availability of films is any indication: 2x3, which has almost the same proportions as 5x7. You wouldn't think it could be contact printed, but Dorothy Norman made some sweet portraits on the 2x3 Stieglitz gave her, and of course he only taught her to contact print. I'm thinking I'll enlarge.

Photographers lobbied Kodak to reinstate TMAX 5x7 when they discontinued it some years ago, so let's hope there's still strength in numbers, numbers like 5 & 7. (I typically edition prints at 35, the multiple of these two numbers, since photographic editioning is of course arbitrariness itself.)

[Jim Galli]

Hi Ken. I shoot a lot of 5X7. Athough the Deardorff is my first love, I bought an even older Kodak than yours a couple of months ago. It's an Eastman Improved #2. Basically just like yours but without the dark stain. Beautiful mellow cherry wood. I bought it for a couple of reasons. First, it was going way too cheap on Ebay, and most importantly, it had an intriguing Graflex focal plane shutter between the camera and the back. Bellows was super, and all it really needs is a bath and some lemon wax. I cleaned and lubed the bushings on the focal plane shutter, and have used it within the last month. You'll have to give me the benefit of the doubt that the contacts look far better than my poor scans. I've loaded some of the fruits from that trip if you're interested. I used a 7 7/8ths inch Protar VII for most of them. The "Ethyl" sign on the old gas pump as well as the "Shell Pump Gardnerville" were shot with the single Protar VII 13 3/4" element. I used both Tmax 100 and Bergger 200 for most shots. In every case the Bergger produced a nicer neg. I keep trying to like Tmax and can't!



Here's (http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/121004Trip5X7s.html) a page of 5X7's done with the "Improved #2", and

Here's (http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/AncientBristlecone.html) a page of 5X7's done in May of '03 in the Ancient Bristlecone Forest.

[Ken Lee]

Jim - Please check your links. They do not work.

[jnantz]

hi ken

i shoot a lot of 5x7 as well. i began shooting with tmax 100, but now i use only outdated tri-x.
the camera i use is a szabad - made in sweden in the 50s and exported to the states. between the 5x7 & 4x5 they
exported a total of 50 cameras. ( i also have a 8x10 by szabad and there were something like 3 or 4 made :) )

anyhow the last 2 portraits on this page: http://www.nanianphoto.com/portraiture.html (http://www.nanianphoto.com/portraiture.html)
were shot with tri-x souped in ansco 130.

j and c also sells 5x7 film, and as soon as i burn through all my tri-x i'll pretty much only be shooting their classic 200.

have fun with your new camera!

-john

[Jim Galli]

Ken, The site must be down. Server problems perhaps. I hope you'll try again later. Jim

[Stephen Willard]

Ken,

For what is worth, I cut my own 5x7 and 4x10 film from 8x10 sheet film. The dust problems associated with this process have not been any worse than normal. With this approach you can use any film you want on the market.

[Mark_3632]

I shoot a restored Kodak 2D just like yours. I had to replace the bellows and you might want to check the rails. I had a lot of missing teeth on the rack. I really like my camera a lot and I am sure you will too. The format is great. Though color film is prohibitively expensive. I shoot Efke PL100 from JandC. I also like classic 200 and Bergger 200, they are the same entity and under the right conditions the negs are really pretty. Efke pushes easily Bergger/Classic 200 does not push at all so shoot in SBRs that require normal or minus development. Shooting for the highlights works pretty good with this film too.

I think contact prints from this size film are very personal, The viewer tends to look very closely at the photograph. They pick them up and really concentrate on them.

[Mark Sampson]

Paul Strand used a 5x7 Home Portrait Graflex for many years and many of his most famous photographs. The story goes (perhaps from Richard Benson) that Strand blocked off both the film gate and the groundglass to achieve what he regarded as the perfect format, which was somthing like 5x6-1/4".

[Ken Lee]

Mark Sampson -

Where might I read more about Paul Strand ?

He is one of my favorites, but I know little about him.

[Jim Galli]

Ken, Links are back up. Jim

[Tim Hyde]

Ken-

Luong (our host) has a beautiful site bristling with gorgeous 5x7s. Makes me want to reconsider my move to 4x5. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/qtluong/ (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/qtluong/)

tim

[Bob Fowler]

Hey Ken,

5X7 is my favorite format. I use an Eastman Improved #2 (same camera as Jim Galli) and a Century 4a Studio camera. I've been using a lot of the J&C films lately, but have put a lot of Ektachrome through the Eastman over the years.

[Mark Sampson]

Ken, there are many good books of Strand's work. But you might also consider "Paul Strand: Essays on his life and work" for some thought-provoking reading.

[Ken Lee]

Thanks Mark - I ordered a copy.

[steve simmons]

If you go to www.vewcamera.com and then to the Free Articles section there is an article on 5x7 cameras.

steve simmons

[Ken Lee]

Excellent article - with very helpful summary info about available film choices. Thanks !

[Sal Santamaura]

"The story goes (perhaps from Richard Benson) that Strand blocked off both the film gate and the groundglass to achieve what he regarded as the perfect format, which was somthing like 5x6-1/4"."

I visited the Strand exhibit at the Getty a few days ago and measured his contact prints made on 5x7 film. They were, with few exceptions, 116mm x 149mm (4 9/16" x 5 13/16"). Only a few images of people were slightly larger in the long dimension, perhaps 10mm longer, but I couldn't measure them exactly because those were displayed as parts of unframed groups approximately 15 cm behind a large pane of glass.

The Getty suffers from "conservator's malady" just like The Huntington and, I presume, most other contemporary museums. That is, most Strand prints were framed behind uncoated glazing and illuminated so minimally that they were difficult to see through one's own reflection. The only exception to this glare was the unframed groups, since they were lit from above within the 15 cm-deep "well" and those lamps did not illuminate the viewer. If curators can't bring the light level up, they should at least use anti-reflection coated glazing, which is available now even in acrylic form.

[Ken Lee]

Thanks for that info.



Many of the images (portraits especially) in the Strand books are in that format. Now that my camera is working, I have enjoyed using it and really love the format. The groundglass has no lines on it - which somehow makes a special difference when composing.



In contact prints, the size has a pleasant intimacy: not "miniature" like 4x5, and not "substantial", like 8x10 and beyond.



<img src="http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/gallery/lake333.jpg"

[John Z.]

In answer to one of your questions; I do not believe TMY 400 is available anymore in 5x7 format (it was at one time-I have one box left). You could buy 8x10 film and cut it into 5x7 sheets theoretically.