Would you like to see separate ULF Cameras & Accessories (11x14 and l

[Ralph Barker]

Would you like to see a separate Cameras and Accessories section for ULF (11x14 and larger)?

[StoneNYC]

I vote a resounding Yes!!

[Ralph Barker]

I vote a resounding Yes!!

You need to click on the boxes of your choice, then the "Vote Now" button to be counted.

[Roger Thoms]

What about 10x12, I always considered that ULF?

I voted no because I think things are fine the way they are, but really a seperate forum would be fine. I view almost everything through the "New Post" search so I doubt I would miss much with a seperate forum.

Roger

[StoneNYC]

You need to click on the boxes of your choice, then the "Vote Now" button to be counted.

I'm on the tapatalk app, I didn't realize it's a poll as that only shows on the website, maybe you can add "poll" to the title so people like me know to go to the website for the poll? Thanks! Glad you said something (noticed I didn't vote) or I wouldn't have known, appreciate that.

[jnantz]

i have a ULF camera for 8-10 years, and have never had trouble finding information i've needed
seems like the forums here have worked fine for years ..

added later:

i forgot it used to have a ULF section, i guess it was fixed when it wasn't broken already
might as well put it back the way it was ...

[Oren Grad]

It's not a huge issue one way or another for me, but I voted yes/yes - it would be a convenience, in part because the search function is so lame.

I'd define as "greater than 80 square inches" rather than "11x14 and larger".

[Ari]

The search function is difficult at times, so having a readily-accessible section on ULF cameras and lenses would be welcome.

I think most would define ULF as anything larger than 8x10, or, as Oren said, greater than 80 square inches.

[Tracy Storer]

Some members may not remember there used to be a ULF section. (pre vBulletin?)
I feel strongly that it will help prevent so many of the same questions being asked over and over, that were answered well a decade or more ago. People interested in entering ULF could spend good time perusing the existing threads. I do feel bad for the moderators having to go through so much old material to re-assign it to ULF where it was originally posted as well as subsequent posts that would have to go there. (maybe there is some vestigial tag on the old posts to make it easier to re-home them to ULF?)

I voted "Yes" for ULF cameras and "Yes" for ULF lenses. I don't remember for certain, but think ULF cameras AND lenses may have been covered in the ULF forum, which might be a more tidy way of doing it, with a sticky at the top of the regular lens forum saying "see the ULF section for ULF lens Q+A"

[Marco Annaratone]

It's not a huge issue one way or another for me, but I voted yes/yes - it would be a convenience, in part because the search function is so lame.

I'd define as "greater than 80 square inches" rather than "11x14 and larger".

I second the "greater than 80 in2" definition.

[angusparker]

Agreed greater than 8x10 should be considered ULF. Not sure how I feel about sub forum for ULF lenses but do think we should have a ULF main forum. Equipment and technical challenges are simply different from LF in general. Thanks for putting poll up.

[karl french]

Definitely a "Yes" on the Camera and Accessory" Section. It should really start with anything bigger than 8x10. (Let's not forget 10x12.) :-)

The lens sub-forum is a tough call though considering that so many of the lenses used with ULF are also used across many different formats.

[Steve Goldstein]

Just a thought as I don't have a horse in this race.

I'm not convinced of the real value of this, as it would only contain future posts. The collected knowledge already here wouldn't be captured unless a moderator went to the immense trouble of moving historical threads into the new sub-forum.

Yes, the vBulletin search function is lame, but a google search with the added term "site:largeformatphotography.info" (absent the quotes, of course) will find what you're looking for if it exists.

[Tracy Storer]

People who don't know, don't know what to search for....it would have to have the old posts restored, then would-be ULF-ers could "browse".
ULF-capable lenses DEFINITELY need to be included as they are likely the most queried topic in ULF.


Just a thought as I don't have a horse in this race.

I'm not convinced of the real value of this, as it would only contain future posts. The collected knowledge already here wouldn't be captured unless a moderator went to the immense trouble of moving historical threads into the new sub-forum.

Yes, the vBulletin search function is lame, but a google search with the added term "site:largeformatphotography.info" (absent the quotes, of course) will find what you're looking for if it exists.

[StoneNYC]

Just a thought as I don't have a horse in this race.

I'm not convinced of the real value of this, as it would only contain future posts. The collected knowledge already here wouldn't be captured unless a moderator went to the immense trouble of moving historical threads into the new sub-forum.

Yes, the vBulletin search function is lame, but a google search with the added term "site:largeformatphotography.info" (absent the quotes, of course) will find what you're looking for if it exists.

Think about why this forum exists, LF is a different animal than 35mm, it's hard to explain to a 35mm only person that LF is different as "film is film" but there's a whole other difficulty as knowledge base to LF.

The same with ULF, although "sheet film is sheet film" it's totally different handling a massive piece of film, also many custom builds and limited users make sifting through the info much more difficult. I appreciate your perspective, but even the small difference between 8x10 and 11x14 is really a huge jump and alteration in process and lens usage, available camera makers, specialized boards and mounts, image circle issues. The difference between "coverage and illumination" and usable image sharpness with a 12x20 contact print vs a lens that covers say 8x10 that you might enlarge is just totally a different perspective.

So your statement that you aren't convinced in the value, think about the value in this whole forum, if you can see value in a dedicated LF forum, you can see value in a dedicated ULF sub-forum. Otherwise we could all be happy perusing the LF area of APUG, or try to ask questions about LF on photo.net. I think you might see the other side now?

Your comment was very much respected and my retort is not meant in any snooty way, was simply trying to help you (and others) see the other side of things who might not have delved into ULF and haven't experienced the sever challenges that exist only in that genre.

Be well.

[Taija71A]

↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑

Unfortunately, even if the above cited Changes/Updates were to be implemented...


The very same people will still be *SPAMMING* the forum 'Day In and Day Out'...
With misinformation, repetitive questions and unnecessary chitchat:


1). Because they don't really understand 'The Basics of Photography'.
(Let alone LF and ULF Photography)

and/or even worse...

2). They are just too d*mn lazy to look up the information for themselves...
And learn it -- Like everyone else had to learn it!


They would much rather...

That other Forum Members continue to spoon-feed them answers -- 'Ad Nauseum!'
(Open new Thread... Ask Question... Wait for Answer...) :(

Then again...
Perhaps they just suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) ???

↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓

[Tin Can]

Yes to to both ULF questions.


Ultimate Logistical Formidable

:)

[vinny]

Is there an option to give stone his own forum?

[ghostcount]

Is there an option to give stone his own forum?

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROvLLvg6rZ3YiAT9PjTmkQcgnnbR8GPhe6d4aEjlqFWZLD6_skfw

[Taija71A]

Is there an option to give stone his own forum?

Please!

Don't forget about Moe...


132306

[Steve Goldstein]

Stone, I do indeed see the value IF (and that's a big if) all prior ULF-related posts could somehow magically be transported to the new sub-forum where they would presumably be found more easily. But that's not going to happen, so the new sub-forum would very largely end up rehashing all that's gone before that already exists in the archives. I certainly appreciate the value of this forum and have learned tremendously from reading many current and past posts. There's already a huge amount of ULF information here if only one is willing to do a bit of searching.

Given the level of commitment required for ULF work (which is why I ultimately decided against pursuing my 7x17 dream, you can search for my "Getting out of 7x17" FS posts) the willingness to put in a little initial effort would be a useful pre-screening exercise.

Maybe what we really need is a short "permanent" article explaining how to use Google search with the forum!

[Corran]

Just like the SF image section, I imagine older ULF-specific threads would be moved as they are found (for instance, bumped up with a new question or additional information).

Searching the archives (here or via Google) will still find relevant threads, regardless of subforum.

Perhaps pertaining to some other posts here, maybe a "Beginners" forum would be helpful.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

It is nice to have ULF related items and issues in a place that is easy to find. If it does not cause the moderators a lot of work then I'm okay with it and if not leave it alone. Lets face it, if you are into ULF you are going to find out what you need to know. It is called working for it! Research and reading.

People new to ULF need to work for it as I say. It is much more rewarding finding information on your own or communicating with forum members who are into ULF. You know who we are!

What will be next a sub forum on alternative printing methods for ULF images? It could get ugly! :);):cool:

[Monty McCutchen]

It is nice to have ULF related items and issues in a place that is easy to find. If it does not cause the moderators a lot of work then I'm okay with it and if not leave it alone. Lets face it, if you are into ULF you are going to find out what you need to know. It is called working for it! Research and reading.

People new to ULF need to work for it as I say. It is much more rewarding finding information on your own or communicating with forum members who are into ULF. You know who we are!

What will be next a sub forum on alternative printing methods for ULF images? It could get ugly! :);):cool:


Jim I know you are kidding but i love the idea of within the sub forum there being threads on ULF portraiture, Landscape, camera building etc so that the trials of those endeavors can be shared, and viewed. I love working in ULF and even though I don't quite feel the superiority that PaulR teased us about :) I do enjoy it greatly and am always quick to point out the aspects of it that have made it rewarding FOR ME.

I'm looking forward to the sub forum and all the thought it might generate about ULF

Monty

[Old-N-Feeble]

Since I don't shoot ULF I didn't vote but IMO I don't think it's a good idea for reasons others already mentioned. IMO: Firstly, I don't think a ULF subforum has any significant benefit for anyone except, perhaps, 'bragging rights'.:p Secondly, there's no way to move all the existing ULF threads so those threads will be unnecessarily scattered. Thirdly, because of the first two reasons cited I think it will only cause confusion.

If a ULF subforum is added then I think 'greater than 80 square inches and/or any side longer than 10 inches' is a better descriptive because this will include 5x12 and 7x11 panoramic formats which are both less less than 80 square inches.;)

[jb7]

Since I don't shoot ULF I didn't vote but IMO I don't think it's a good idea for reasons others already mentioned. IMO: Firstly, I don't think a ULF subforum has any significant benefit for anyone except, perhaps, 'bragging rights'.:p Secondly, there's no way to move all the existing ULF threads so those threads will be unnecessarily scattered. Thirdly, because of the first two reasons cited I think it will only cause confusion.

If a ULF subforum is added then I think 'greater than 80 square inches and/or any side longer than 10 inches' is a better descriptive because this will include 5x12 and 7x11 panoramic formats which are both less less than 80 square inches.;)

I sometimes use more than 80 square inches of a film in one negative, but I have to admit that I do agree with everything else in the statement above.
The less places there are to put things, the easier they are to find...

[sanking]

If a ULF subforum is added then I think 'greater than 80 square inches and/or any side longer than 10 inches' is a better descriptive because this will include 5x12 and 7x11 panoramic formats which are both less less than 80 square inches.;)

I agree on the importance of including the 5X12 and 7X11 formats. I have always thought of these formats as ULF, even though the total area is less than 80 square inches.

Sandy

[Lachlan 717]

The less places there are to put things, the easier they are to find...

Ergo, if we had no sub-fora, it would be easier to find a for sale listing in with a small format image listing in amongst Feb 13's portraits? I can't agree with your statement. There is obviously a balance somewhere between no sub-fora and many; whether a ULF pushes it into the latter is still the crux of this thread.

[karl french]

I can think of a lot of sub-forums we could get rid of in order to make room for the much more relevant ULF sub-forums.

[jb7]

I really don't think it matters how many sub-fora there are, beyond a certain point. You wouldn't be the first person here recently who put up a straw man against me; I really can't see what the attraction must be for you.

I get it. You want a forum, which is fine. It would be good if you could make a rational argument for it, rather than make a fallacious one against mine.

btw, I don’t know how you find anything; I can usually find whatever I want in only one section- google.

Karl, that's a far more rational argument in support of a ULF forum, but I don't think Lachlan will agree with you...

[StoneNYC]

I can think of a lot of sub-forums we could get rid of in order to make room for the much more relevant ULF sub-forums.

+1!

[Old-N-Feeble]

The way I see it is: 'In for an inch... in for a mile'. If the forum was a few months old then fine, go ahead and make major changes. However, this forum has been around a very very long time with countless ULF posts. Those will be all but lost and forgotten if a new ULF subforum is introduced. IMHO, it's completely illogical this late in the process. Why create the confusion and disconnects?

[neil poulsen]

I agree on the importance of including the 5X12 and 7X11 formats. I have always thought of these formats as ULF, even though the total area is less than 80 square inches.

Sandy

Perhaps ULF could be defined as having a side greater than 10"?

I don't think that ULF threads accumulate that rapidly at APUG. I'd suggest having a single forum for cameras, accessories, and lenses.

Perhaps there's a spare moderator lurking in the shadows somewhere who could transfer existing threads into this new forum, if formed?

Did I vote Yes?

[neil poulsen]

In favor.

[Old-N-Feeble]

See post #25. :D


Perhaps ULF could be defined as having a side greater than 10"?

I don't think that ULF threads accumulate that rapidly at APUG. I'd suggest having a single forum for cameras, accessories, and lenses.

Perhaps there's a spare moderator lurking in the shadows somewhere who could transfer existing threads into this new forum, if formed?

Did I vote Yes?

[Corran]

However, this forum has been around a very very long time with countless ULF posts. Those will be all but lost and forgotten if a new ULF subforum is introduced. IMHO, it's completely illogical this late in the process. Why create the confusion and disconnects?

The only thing illogical to me is this idea that one would only find ULF information by actively scrolling through only the designated subforum.

Again, the search function, either here or through Google, finds any thread in any forum with no issue whatsoever. If an ULF-related thread gets 'bumped' for some reason outside of the ULF subforum, a mod would probably move it at that time. Otherwise, if you are looking for a specific piece of information, you'd search for it. If you were just browsing in general, you probably aren't wading through the Camera and Camera Accessories subforum looking for the occasional ULF thread.

Nothing will be "lost and forgotten" more than it already has - and Google will fix that problem for you instantly.

[neil poulsen]

See post #25. :D

I didn't see that post. We're in agreement on a possible definition.

[Kodachrome25]

There's already a huge amount of ULF information here if only one is willing to do a bit of searching.


A bit of searching, LOL?

I did a LOT of searching for two weeks before posting some questions to which I was promptly told multiple times that Google is my friend!! To top that off I got answers that were practically written in Jello, far too many opinions to make an "informed" decision on.

I find here much more so than other photo forums that in some cases of certain personalities there is this distinct old guard country club crap going on here that is beyond off putting, especially to newcomers who may have decades of experience or even decades of pro experience in other formats but somehow get made to feel like some kind of lazy moron for asking questions that are every bit as valid as any other.


People new to ULF need to work for it as I say. It is much more rewarding finding information on your own or communicating with forum members who are into ULF. You know who we are!

LOL…Oh man, “work for it” on a forum that is supposed to be about sharing knowledge, passion and images from large format ( and ULF? ). Might as well just get rid of the whole forum then so people just suck it up and “work for it”. And how is a newcomer supposed to find “We” in terms of that special “we are the ULF experts" country club? wow.

I vote big time to add the ULF component including lenses. I also would implore everyone here to lend a hand in perhaps somehow "tagging" certain threads that could be moved to the new forum over time. I certainly will dig up my threads and PM them to the mods if this new sub-forum happens.

And thanks again Hugo Zhang for showing me in person what lenses actually work on 16x20....you were passionate, friendly and personal. I am still going to get the camera and lens when the time is right...

[Sal Santamaura]

...I got answers that were practically written in Jello, far too many opinions to make an "informed" decision on...Contributors here are screened only to the extent that they meet minimal criteria for signing up and, on an ongoing basis, don't break the rules. That's it. The Large Format Photography Forum is not an accredited university with senior professors. The only thing readers get are the opinions of other members. Said opinions number at least as many as the number of posters, sometimes more. :D It is incumbent upon readers to become familiar with other members' posts and, after a time, make determinations about the reliability/veracity of those other members' opinions. Just like in real life.


...beyond off putting, especially to newcomers who may have decades of experience or even decades of pro experience in other formats but somehow get made to feel like some kind of lazy moron for asking questions that are every bit as valid as any other. ...Repeatedly strutting one's experience and success when they haven't provided one answers and then bringing their unanswered questions here is a behavior I find rather off putting. Also, in my opinion, asking questions already responded to in the forum's database diminishes their validity as new posts, and helps others evaluate the asker's value as a member (not their value as a photographer).


...Might as well just get rid of the whole forum then so people just suck it up and “work for it”....The other alternative is for those who don't want to work for what the archive frequently already contains not to post redundant questions, i.e. "self deport" from the forum. Getting rid of this free, incredibly valuable resource is not a reasonable response to the forum being different than what one thinks it should be. Working within its parameters is, in my opinion, a vastly better approach.

[neil poulsen]

. . . Perhaps there's a spare moderator lurking in the shadows somewhere who could transfer existing threads into this new forum, if formed? . . .

To clarify, I was kind of referring to myself in this comment.

[jb7]

Yes, of course...

[Kirk Gittings]

The subject is only of casual curiosity to me personally so I'll leave the voting up to those with a dog in this hunt.

[Old-N-Feeble]

So... will a separate ULF forum add to or distract from the overall functionality of the site and/or ULF discussions in general? My humble opinion is it probably adds little or nothing and may distract and confuse. That stated, if the majority wants it then let them have it. Perhaps it could be done on a trial basis for a couple of months and the threads moved if it isn't working well?

[StoneNYC]

a bit of searching, lol?

I did a lot of searching for two weeks before posting some questions to which i was promptly told multiple times that google is my friend!! To top that off i got answers that were practically written in jello, far too many opinions to make an "informed" decision on.

I find here much more so than other photo forums that in some cases of certain personalities there is this distinct old guard country club crap going on here that is beyond off putting, especially to newcomers who may have decades of experience or even decades of pro experience in other formats but somehow get made to feel like some kind of lazy moron for asking questions that are every bit as valid as any other.



Lol…oh man, “work for it” on a forum that is supposed to be about sharing knowledge, passion and images from large format ( and ulf? ). Might as well just get rid of the whole forum then so people just suck it up and “work for it”. And how is a newcomer supposed to find “we” in terms of that special “we are the ulf experts" country club? Wow.

I vote big time to add the ulf component including lenses. I also would implore everyone here to lend a hand in perhaps somehow "tagging" certain threads that could be moved to the new forum over time. I certainly will dig up my threads and pm them to the mods if this new sub-forum happens.

And thanks again hugo zhang for showing me in person what lenses actually work on 16x20....you were passionate, friendly and personal. I am still going to get the camera and lens when the time is right...


this ^^^^

+1,000,000,000

[karl french]

That was just a problem of someone with a very self-entitled attitude asking questions that had been asked many times in the past and being unwilling to listen to the answers given.

[rdenney]

... Also, in my opinion, asking questions already responded to in the forum's database diminishes their validity as new posts, and helps others evaluate the asker's value as a member (not their value as a photographer).

What I find off-putting:

1. Asking for help, getting the help they need rather than what they might be asking for, and then complaining that the person who provided the help was rude or mean to them.

2. Asking for help and then arguing with answers from those who have established experience and authoritativeness on the topic. (Part of the reason one reads the archive is to learn who has such experience and authority.)

3. Those with experience putting newbies through hazing rituals. vBulletin's search engine sucks, but Google's extra power still doesn't always find stuff we remember from years past.

Some people will think the same response to a newbie question falls into category 3, when someone else thinks it falls into category 1, and vice versa. Sometimes, both are true.

The purpose of this forum is to provide a resource to large-format photographers of all skill levels. I would commend new members not to be in category 1, and old members not to be in category 3. Category 2 is obviously disrespectful, and if extreme enough, will get removed for rudeness. But, in general, newbies should expect to be scolded for asking the wrong questions--old guys often do that--and old guys should expect impertinence from young'uns. I think Plato, or maybe it was Socrates, wrote about that. Nothing new here, but thicker skin would allow people to laugh it off rather than take it personally.

Beginners do not benefit from an answer to questions they do not understand, and those with experience may lead them to a different set of issues more relevant to their situation. They may do so wrongly, but even when right the beginners may resist the redirection. But some old guys are curmudgeons about it while some young guys disrespect experience and argue about stuff they have no experience with. This is not just true in large-format photography, but large-format photography is a traditional process that favors experience.

This is especially true with ULF. You'll never see me offer an answer to a question about ULF, even back before I was a mod and put in my two cents on many topics, because I have no experience with it. But I can well understand that it offers trials and tribulations beyond 4x5 and 8x10, even as 4x5 offers difficulties beyond roll-film cameras, even roll-film view cameras. (Those smaller cameras offer their own special difficulties, of course.)

Now, for Kirk: Don't sit out of the vote just because you don't do ULF. We want to hear from those who presently do ULF or are directly interested in it, but we also want to hear from those who don't. Those who don't may be happy to be rid of having to skip past ULF threads, or they may feel as though they learn from the interaction and wouldn't want to see it segregated.

The main question for deciding to create a separate topical forum is if creating it will enhance the discussion on the topic or diminish it. We want to enhance the discussion, not diminish it.

Rick "respectfully submitted" Denney

[Michael R]

#2 above is problematic on any forum, I think. "established experience and authoritativeness" is very often established in the mind(s) of the "authority" and/or a handful of others, and nowhere else.

[rdenney]

#2 above is problematic on any forum, I think. "established experience and authoritativeness" is very often established in the mind(s) of the "authority" and/or a handful of others, and nowhere else.

It's for the reader to determine. But the reader has to read to do so.

Rick "clairvoyance doesn't work" Denney

[StoneNYC]

#2 above is problematic on any forum, I think. "established experience and authoritativeness" is very often established in the mind(s) of the "authority" and/or a handful of others, and nowhere else.

+1


It's for the reader to determine. But the reader has to read to do so.

Rick "clairvoyance doesn't work" Denney

Or those who don't actually have the experience and are working off of theory and second hand info as well as those only looking to make mocking comments like children could stop posting nonsense and save us all a lot of time.

~Stone "who had written a book to try and be polite and decided being direct and to the point was better"

[karl french]

Stone,

Are you really concerned about saving us all a lot of time?

30 months, 4,351 posts.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Jim I know you are kidding but i love the idea of within the sub forum there being threads on ULF portraiture, Landscape, camera building etc so that the trials of those endeavors can be shared, and viewed. I love working in ULF and even though I don't quite feel the superiority that PaulR teased us about :) I do enjoy it greatly and am always quick to point out the aspects of it that have made it rewarding FOR ME.

I'm looking forward to the sub forum and all the thought it might generate about ULF

Monty

Monty, I'm glad that you saw the humor in my comments. Some did not. I have been teaching for a number of years now and I've always been an open book when people ask me how I do what I do. I have taught countless people over the years not only my way of doing photography for free but several people both here and over seas carbon transfer printing for free.
If the passion for knowledge about ULF is there then you will find it! You will know who to ask because you have taken the time to find the network of all of the other crazy ULF photographers out there.
I've always been here to help because I've worked for it! Support for ULF continues on this forum in the regular forum or in a separate sub forum I know we will all help others however we can.


LOL…Oh man, “work for it” on a forum that is supposed to be about sharing knowledge, passion and images from large format ( and ULF? ). Might as well just get rid of the whole forum then so people just suck it up and “work for it”. And how is a newcomer supposed to find “We” in terms of that special “we are the ULF experts" country club? wow.

Now K25 really? Lighten up! Maybe I'm different from most but I read and research a lot as well. I was berated for wanting to build my first 8 x 20 camera on my own with nothing but hand tools. It did not deter me.

When you find information on your own I feel it is more rewarding, at least for me. If you are a newcomer then that is great! But you have to Ask questions? We are not a country club?

Look at my signature it says I'm an LF/ULF photographer in my avatar. One way to find out.

I'm sorry that you did not see the humor in my comments.

Hugo is a friend and can tell you many names as can I. Just ask away.

[StoneNYC]

Stone,

Are you really concerned about saving us all a lot of time?

30 months, 4,351 posts.

If you look at my posts per day, it is less than 5.

Many of those were questions and/or wtb/fs and the aforementioned rebuttals trying to get to the answer I asked instead of what others felt I needed.

Considering I'm currently following 1,149 threads, that's only 4 posts per thread, that's not really as high as it might seem.

That said, I am working on leading by example, especially in the past month, and hoping people will eventually notice.

[AlexGard]

I don't use a ULF camera, I would should the right deal come along... but I would vote yes for the ULf subforum because a few times out of curiosity I've gone digging the boards for ULF specific threads to learn more about it. Seems there are a few folks here who do shoot it and I'd be interested to read the banter between them.

[jb7]

I'm approximately 150% in agreement with the poll above.

Before I try to figure it out myself, can anyone explain the ultra large percentages?

[Ralph Barker]

I'm approximately 150% in agreement with the poll above.

Before I try to figure it out myself, can anyone explain the ultra large percentages?

It's a multiple-choice poll, so the percentages won't add up to 100%.

[brandon13]

I am shooting a lot of 11x14 Wet Plates this year. I plan on shooting 16x20 or 12x20 later this year if I can find the right camera. I am in favor of this. Thanks. Brandon
http://brandonfernandez.com

[Len Middleton]

I agree on the importance of including the 5X12 and 7X11 formats. I have always thought of these formats as ULF, even though the total area is less than 80 square inches.

Maybe the title needs to be broader e.g. "ULF, LF Panoramic, & Uncommon LF Formats" or something like that
i.e. other than 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10

[Ralph Barker]

The new ULF camera sub-forum has been created, using a 13" diagonal as the criteria for being classified as "ULF". Lenses remain in one sub-forum, since ULF-capable lenses may also be required on non-ULF formats when extreme movements are used.

Members are encouraged to use the "report post" icon to "report" ULF camera posts in the regular camera sub-forum that relate to ULF, so mods can move those posts to the new forum over time.

[Old-N-Feeble]

I applaud the mods' willingness to add extra time and effort into moving previous and future posts into the new ULF subforum. I expect this will keep you guys a little extra busy for awhile.

[Tin Can]

I applaud the mods' willingness to add extra time and effort into moving previous and future posts into the new ULF subforum. I expect this will keep you guys a little extra busy for awhile.

I second that emotion!

For a little while I have been prefacing my ULF posts with 'ULF', perhaps once we start accumulating contributions I should stop that?

[Old-N-Feeble]

I'd still use accurate descriptives in the titles... it's better for google searches.

[Ralph Barker]

. . . For a little while I have been prefacing my ULF posts with 'ULF', perhaps once we start accumulating contributions I should stop that?

Short, but complete and accurate thread titles will always be advantageous compared to the "I have a problem" sort.

[Lachlan 717]

Thanks, Mods!

[Andrew Plume]

I missed the vote and wasn't able to contribute

If I had it would have been "a resounding positive" in favour

Unless, I'm wrong there's a real lack of information available online for potential ULF users, yes, there's a thread over on 'apug' but (to me) it's not overly extensive

good luck and regards
andrew