New ULF Camera sub-forum

[Ralph Barker]

A new sub-forum has been created for Cameras - ULF (Ultra Large Format) and Accessories. We're using a diagonal of 13" or larger as the "ULF" criteria. Lenses remain as a single sub-forum, as ULF-capable lenses may also be required for non-ULF formats when extreme movements are employed.

[William Whitaker]

Thanks Ralph!

[Monty McCutchen]

Fantastic!

Monty

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Okay, I'm in!

[ndg]

That is awesome!

[Steven Tribe]

Not making a ULF lens section was a wise decision in my view.

Although the new ULF Cameras section is planned ( I think) as a big brother parallel to the present camera section, it already has image contributions. Surely, these should still go in the appropriate further down the section list?

Otherwise we will have an ULF nude, landscape, ruins etc. image sub- sections in ULF Cameras!

[Steven Tribe]

The situation is becoming impossible!

The ULF Camera section is being used for everything and anything to do with ULF, including DIY and FS!

Please post a sticky to define exactly what ULF cameras and access. means!

[Steven Tribe]

And many thanks for the appropriate action!

[William Whitaker]

The ULF Camera section is being used for everything and anything to do with ULF, including DIY and FS!


Can you be specific? I did not see a F/S ad.

[Old-N-Feeble]

What's so wrong with ULF DIY posts in the ULF forum? WTS/WTB/WTT offers shouldn't be there but I think the concern is misplaced. I think Steven is referring to the post regarding a new 8x20 camera in pre-production phase. That poster isn't currently offering anything for sale. He's just mentioning possible future availability.

[Monty McCutchen]

And many thanks for the appropriate action!

I'm not a moderators moderate too much guy. I think they do a wonderful job. I respectfully disagree with this decision and would ask that it be reconsidered however. There are thousands of threads on our wonderful forum, if we added ULF image threads of nudes, landscapes, still life's, those few extra threads suddenly make the situation impossible and a form of insanity? We have a portrait thread for January, February,March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December EVERY YEAR, but one for ULF suddenly makes the site too hard to navigate? That is illogical. So as it stands now I can start a thread about the minutia of grain structure on my Ebony 20 x 24 but I can't post pictures with it and discuss the exponentially difficultness of depth of field so that someone interested in jumping into this field can easily find the nuisances of moving up in format outside of what trays to buy. There are many aspects to ULF work production some of which are gear oriented, many of which are not. A sub forum should be all inclusive and not so narrow in scope that others can't go to examples that are indicative of the formats they are drawn to. Over 600 views in a few short days of the ULF PORTRAIT thread says plenty of folks found it interesting enough to explore. That speaks volumes to me about its validity

Respectfully

Monty

[cowanw]

Agree with Monty. People can figure out what's chaff or grain for themselves. No need to get your knickers in an ultra large knot.

[StoneNYC]

The situation is becoming impossible!

The ULF Camera section is being used for everything and anything to do with ULF, including DIY and FS!

Please post a sticky to define exactly what ULF cameras and access. means!

If the "tiny format" area can have its own image threads and such, I still don't see why the ULF area shouldn't be able to have its own as well, makes a lot more sense to have an ULF image thread than a tiny format image thread on a LF forum.

And with the lenses argument, you can use a 90mm SA lens on a 35mm SLR with a bellows adapter, but you're still going to call that LF and list it in the LF section. So why would a lens like a 35" petzval or 1100 XXL Art lens be listed under LF when clearly the majority of users will be ULF users, not 4x5 users... So I still don't see why there shouldn't just be a TOTAL ULF sub-section with all the various lens and equipment and image sharing all in its own area.

BUT I'm glad there is a new ULF section at all, don't get me wrong, I just personally think that keeping it so specific to only camera and accessories which is only part of the ULF arena limits the usefulness of the area.

In other words, I think I'm with Monty...

[Tin Can]

I'm not a moderators moderate too much guy. I think they do a wonderful job. I respectfully disagree with this decision and would ask that it be reconsidered however. There are thousands of threads on our wonderful forum, if we added ULF image threads of nudes, landscapes, still life's, those few extra threads suddenly make the situation impossible and a form of insanity? We have a portrait thread for January, February,March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December EVERY YEAR, but one for ULF suddenly makes the site too hard to navigate? That is illogical. So as it stands now I can start a thread about the minutia of grain structure on my Ebony 20 x 24 but I can't post pictures with it and discuss the exponentially difficultness of depth of field so that someone interested in jumping into this field can easily find the nuisances of moving up in format outside of what trays to buy. There are many aspects to ULF work production some of which are gear oriented, many of which are not. A sub forum should be all inclusive and not so narrow in scope that others can't go to examples that are indicative of the formats they are drawn to. Over 600 views in a few short days of the ULF PORTRAIT thread says plenty of folks found it interesting enough to explore. That speaks volumes to me about its validity

Respectfully

Monty

Well seen

[Steven Tribe]

The FS in the new ULF Camera thread was from Jim Fitz. I thought the pre-start carbon camera idea was in exactly the right category.

There are merits in having a wider based ULF section, like the small format section, but the concensus in the mods was for a restricted hardware section.

I have 15x12", 30x40cm and 24x30cm cameras and I personally agree with the hardware decision. But I think the present differentiation between LF and ULF is a very strange one and would prefer a split between cameras around 4x5" and anything larger that can have "stand alone" contact prints.

[Ralph Barker]

The structure of the forum has an underlying logic to the separation of topics. The new ULF Cameras and Accessories sub-forum needs to conform to that logic.

[prendt]

A new sub-forum has been created for Cameras - ULF (Ultra Large Format) and Accessories. We're using a diagonal of 13" or larger as the "ULF" criteria. Lenses remain as a single sub-forum, as ULF-capable lenses may also be required for non-ULF formats when extreme movements are employed.

Nothing short of revolutionary!

[Steven Tribe]

Looking much better now - apart from the ULF build threads have been moved there from DIY!


The structure of the forum has an underlying logic to the separation of topics. The new ULF Cameras and Accessories sub-forum needs to conform to that logic.

[prendt]

The structure of the forum has an underlying logic to the separation of topics. The new ULF Cameras and Accessories sub-forum needs to conform to that logic.

Well said! You nailed it down!

[Steve Sherman]

Rectangle ULF OK ??

[Ralph Barker]

Rectangle ULF OK ??

Even a circular ULF camera would be OK, as long as the diameter (the circle's equivalent of the diagonal) was 13" or larger.

[analoguey]

Would older ulf threads move there?
I'm asking cos, in the case of someone searching for answers on ULF(down the line), may not look at the other sections ?

[Tin Can]

Would older ulf threads move there?
I'm asking cos, in the case of someone searching for answers on ULF(down the line), may not look at the other sections ?

Yes, as we find them. They are moving silently as we sleep.

[prendt]

Even a circular ULF camera would be OK, as long as the diameter (the circle's equivalent of the diagonal) was 13" or larger.

You have really thought of it all! Bravo!

[Steve Sherman]

Even a circular ULF camera would be OK, as long as the diameter (the circle's equivalent of the diagonal) was 13" or larger.
Just having some fun with the word diagonal

[Ralph Barker]

Just having some fun with the word diagonal

Yep. At my age, I try not to dwell on "horizontal". ;-)

[rdenney]

A sub forum should be all inclusive and not so narrow in scope that others can't go to examples that are indicative of the formats they are drawn to. Over 600 views in a few short days of the ULF PORTRAIT thread says plenty of folks found it interesting enough to explore. That speaks volumes to me about its validity

Monty, there is nothing preventing one from illustrating a point about a camera or form using an image, even in the camera forums. That is not the same thing as "image sharing", which exists for the sake of the image only. And there is nothing preventing one from linking to posts in the image forums when a topic about the camera comes up.

The point of the ULF sub-forum is not to advocate for it, but rather to provide a resource for those who use it. Those folks need no persuasion of the format's validity. Others who might be in a position to be persuaded may not venture into the ULF subforum at all, but might still be drawn by an image they see in one of the image forums. This helps tie this community together instead of fracturing it too much into special interests. That is always a tricky balance.

If someone wants to provide a list of links to image threads or posts that particularly illustrate the advantages of the use of ULF cameras and formats, then I will make it a sticky in the ULF forum so that those who are starting an exploration know where to look.

Rick "one community, various interests" Denney

[Kodachrome25]

The point of the ULF sub-forum is not to advocate for it, but rather to provide a resource for those who use it. Those folks need no persuasion of the format's validity.

So a person who is investigating the possible use of a ULF format is not exactly encouraged by this phrasing to be invited to inquire about said format, no?


Just pointing out how the quoted statement might come across to some...

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I think this is the place to ask any question you want about ULF. Most all of us started small and worked our way up. I know I'm learning a lot all the time with all the postings here and elsewhere on the forum. Anyone can PM me if they have a question regarding ULF. I my know the answer or I may not. I may know who does though.

[Ralph Barker]

So a person who is investigating the possible use of a ULF format is not exactly encouraged by this phrasing to be invited to inquire about said format, no?


Just pointing out how the quoted statement might come across to some...

The continued existence of this forum, and the resource it provides, quietly advocates for all LF formats, with no favoritism for any particular format. Members are, of course, free to express their enthusiasm for their format of choice in their posts, within the spirit of the forum guidelines.

[Sal Santamaura]

Before this forum converted to vBulletin software, it used "categories." The only way to visit the forum was with all posts showing, i.e. similar to the current "Unified View." Assigning individual threads to categories simply made searching the (then much smaller) archive easier, since one was able to bring up each category separately and either scroll through or use CTRL+F on the browser page to locate titles of interest.

I've never found the vBulletin nomenclature particularly good. This is the Large Format Photography Forum. Singular. What vBulletin refers to as "Forums" are in reality the categories of old. I still visit by using a "posts from the last 30 days" search


http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/search.php?do=getdaily&days=30

so that I'm presented with exactly the same all-categories result as was displayed before vBulletin. The dedicated search function is fairly useless, so these days I simply do an advanced search using Google by entering terms of interest followed by


site:largeformatphotography.info

which limits the search engine to what's cached from this site.

Bottom line: "ULF sub-forum," like all the other "sub-forums," is a relatively meaningless term. They're all just tags for threads in the top-level "real" forum. My advice: bookmark the 30-day link I posted above, scan what's new when you visit and read threads of interest. That way you'll get to know everyone here, not need to constantly go back and forth between a bunch of categories and won't miss anything. It's a lot less cluttered too since FS/WTB bumping was limited to once per week. :)