The making of a large format image

[marcookie]

Hello,

I made a video about the making of an 8x10 print. Very basic and descriptive. Perhaps useful for who is stumbling here in the forum out of curiosity, or as a possible reference to show/explain the process to non large-format photographers.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDVYpaphveA

[David Schaller]

These videos are great. Well done.

[Alan Klein]

Nice video. Where are the other three?

[Drew Wiley]

Flimsy little ball head with an 8x10? I won't even bother viewing if it's that amateurish.

[Vaughn]

Nicely done video. Very good for those asking "Do I want to go into large format? What does it entail?" It is twice as long as it should be for just a general informational video about LF...considering attention spands these days...but a good source of info if one is seriously interested in finding out what all this LF stuff is all about.

That head is fine for that lightweight camera/lens combo and urban use. Just got a used Gitzo G1376 ballhead for my old set of Studex legs -- for the 5x7. It has been awhile since I used a Gitzo Ball No.2 on the same model legs for 4x5. The 4x5 camera was 2.5 pounds with the lens...it is all about matching up the equipment to each other and to how one works. I'll give the ballhead and 5x7 a go this summer and see how I like the combo again. I was getting tired of the three handles of the Bogan 3047 sticking out everywhere while carrying it...and the new (to me) ballhead will make it easier to strap the pod to my pack and bike.

[Drew Wiley]

Contact printers get away with all kinds of misdemeanors that would constitute felonies with substantial enlargement, Vaughn. It looks like a Canham camera he's using, and I wouldn't consider using even the lighter 5X7 camera that way - I've specifically tested em with tripod setups - not even my really light Ebony 4x5, which loses something even with a good Gitzo pan-tilt head below it. I can tell the difference in the enlargement, and it amounts to a substantial loss of accuracy. Anyway, I've seen that particular video before, and I think a couple of other ones he did.

[Vaughn]

Just a felony looking for a melody...:cool:

[Drew Wiley]

You would have gotten a good laugh at me the other day - I'm trying to condition my knees for high country backpacking pretty soon, so threw in a whole pile of MF gear into the pack to get it good n heavy, then strapped my bigger Ries on the back. Then I spotted something nice in the redwoods, so there I was with that big spike-foot wooden tripod and a little Fuji 6x9 rangefinder atop it - the epitome of ridiculous support overkill. Much of my view camera stuff was in a different pack set aside in prep for the mtn trip.

[javierternero]

Thank you very much for the video. Looking forward for the next ones. Regards. Javier

[Luis-F-S]

Good video look forward to the next ones

[grat]

Flimsy little ball head with an 8x10? I won't even bother viewing if it's that amateurish.

I've been shopping tripod heads lately, and I'm pretty sure that's an Arca-Swiss D4m rated at 75 pounds, with independent locking axes.

The Intrepid he's got sitting on it weighs less than 10 pounds even with lens and film back.

How big a head does he need?

[Kiwi7475]

I've been shopping tripod heads lately, and I'm pretty sure that's an Arca-Swiss D4m rated at 75 pounds, with independent locking axes.

The Intrepid he's got sitting on it weighs less than 10 pounds even with lens and film back.

How big a head does he need?

Lol, definitely overkill and more expensive than the intrepid.

[Drew Wiley]

Deadload "rating" has nothing to do with actual stability against wobble. You can buy a ladder weight rated at 300 lbs that will blow over in light breeze. It's all about torque vectors. Basic physics. The longer the extension, the lens weight at the end, the width of the camera bed, the rigidity of the standards, all these are factors perhaps more important than camera weight itself. Then add a breeze or whatever. Do the math if you like. But a mockup test prior to purchase is a hecka lot easier, or else the right to return if it doesn't work out.

[Kiwi7475]

Deadload "rating" has nothing to do with actual stability against wobble. You can buy a ladder weight rated at 300 lbs that will blow over in light breeze. It's all about torque vectors. Basic physics. The longer the extension, the lens weight at the end, the width of the camera bed, the rigidity of the standards, all these are factors perhaps more important than camera weight itself. Then add a breeze or whatever. Do the math if you like. But a mockup test prior to purchase is a hecka lot easier, or else the right to return if it doesn't work out.

Of course. Short of finding a b&m shop that carries high end head balls that will allow you to test it yourself, the usual rule of thumb is that the tripod plus head load capacity should be at least twice —maybe 3 times— the maximum combined weight of the camera and heaviest lens that you are going to put on it.

It’s still overkill for the camera and lenses shown in the video. But it’s a wonderful head, maybe second to the Cube.

[Drew Wiley]

My 8x10 is just as light, and it would be anathema to me to risk vibration from ANY kind of ballhead, where all the torque is concentrated on the fulcrum of a narrow neck. Then it adds height between the tripod platform and camera bed at the worst possible point. I won't even use a heavy pan-tilt head. It makes a difference. Maybe in a studio setup where they're using high-speed strobe they can get away with that kind of thing, but in the field with longer exposures the name of the game is reducing vibration to a minimum. You are only as good as your weakest link.

[Kiwi7475]

Ok let’s not turn this thread into yet another debate on the evilness of ball heads... we have plenty of those already... nuff said :-)