I would like to learn how to do macrophotography with my 8X10.

[carterwj]

I would like to learn how to do macrophotography with my 8X10. I realize that close focus may take my bellows beyond its normal travel range. I would like to be able to use my standard lens (CALTAR II-N 360 mm) for macro photography. Perhaps have someone's face fill the entire frame. Is this practical with 8X10?

[EBJohnson]

I’ve been playing with this on 4x5… but have been having a hard time figuring out the minimum focus distances…

So… I’m responding to follow and learn…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oslolens]

The 360mm needs 720mm bellows at 1:1, so it depends on your camera and whether you are willing to buy extension lens board.
At 1:2 you will need 360+360/2, and at 1:4 360+360/4 and so on.

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk

[Tin Can]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2gQuyVMc6g

https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/51549649804/in/datetaken/

I have done 3-1 Macro with a 360mm Plasmat using nearly 6 feet of bellows onto 11X14 X-Ray

Let me know if these links work as i am having problems with flickr

[Oslolens]

Here is Matt M doing 8x10 macro and discussing lens focal lengths. This is quite good!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j2gQuyVMc6g

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk

[Tin Can]

Yes, my first link is Matt

LF Macro is a great winter sport as I can do it inside

I have a dedicated Levy copy camera that has 3 Calumet backs, 4X5, 5X7, 8X10 and a Horsemen, Sinar size lens board mount

I use very bright lamps for focus and setup, then may use other lighting

I now use Schneider Kreuznach APO Symmar 120mm f/5.6 MC Lens Copal 0 as it is a darn good lens for Macro

You don't need a special lens, just do it with what you have

[Tin Can]

11X14 contact print from X-Ray using Studio Deardorff upside down

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51548129042_fc5865cee8_c.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/Uzmee4)50792636846_affa499427_c (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/Uzmee4) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51549166113_59fc666646_c.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/607LAf)51043702316_8d630d573c_c (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/607LAf) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51549656254_e7a96b8526_c.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/83q80u)51090741875_20e59b46fc_c (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/83q80u) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

2 to 1 8X10 underdeveloped X-Ray

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51076031017_1deb5a7e70_c.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/8SZ8b4)2021-03-27-0005 (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/8SZ8b4) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[John Layton]

Did this ages ago with a vertically mounted 4x5 crown graphic, reverse mounted 55mm micro nikkor lens, with single desk lamp at a strong angle...of watch movement components floating on the surface tension in a dixie-cup of water upon which is also "floating" (by surface tension) a layer of aluminum powder. Exposure was long (I think about one minute), done with only the light switch:

220112

[Bernice Loui]

Shorter focal length lenses that can never deliver a proper image circle at infinity focus, but can easily cover the film format required at close up distances. This works to a significant advantage as shorter focal length lenses reduces the camera/bellows extension needed to achieve a given image ratio/image size on ground glass and film. There is no real limit as to how close any given view camera lens could be focused.. Optical performance will suffer much with lenses designed and optimized for infinity -vs- lenses designed and optimized for life size or 1:1 image ratios. Exception to this would be symmetrical lenses such as the APO process lens (Dialyte) works GOOD at infinity focus to life size 1:1..

Close focus, simply add camera/bellows extension as needed.
220121

Keep in mind, view camera is servant to the demands of the lens and image goals.

~Then comes the FAR more serious difficulty and challenge of lighting/metering for proper exposure, which is more often than not the real challenge to macro or similar images be it film, digital or _ .



Bernice

[Drew Wiley]

I really like my 360/10 Fujinon A for close-up 8x10 work. It's better corrected than general purpose plasmats for this kind of usage, but superb at infinity too. Rare and pricey, unfortunately. My Apo Nikkor 240, 305, and 360 process dialytes would also be superb; but these are barrel lenses and would need to be shutter mounted. But they can be obtained quite reasonably these days, if you don't factor in the extra expense of a shutter, that is. Something like a 240, 270, or 300 G-Claron would also work quite well. You need a lot of bellows draw for closeup work, regardless.

But just getting a facial portrait onto 8x10 film would not be classified as close-up or macro photography in terms of special lens requirements. A wart on someone's nose filling 8x10 would. So that frees you up to think in terms of other priorities, namely, the kind of "look" you want from the lens - which will open a whole other can of worms with almost endless recommendations. Many portrait clients don't necessarily want too much detail accentuated, like warts and zits and wrinkles.

[EBJohnson]

220121


...How do you even focus at that kind of bellows draw?...

[Drew Wiley]

I hope the dentist isn't ramming something like that down my mouth next month.

[carterwj]

Thank you. Great photos.

[carterwj]

Good inputs. Thank you everyone. So it sounds like there are no dedicated macro lenses like in the smaller formats. Bernice, that bellows extension is impressive. Lighting/metering is a whole other topic that I am going to ask about in another thread.

[Bernice Loui]

Skip the dedicated/speciality "macro" view camera lens, get an APO process lens in shutter then make images...

As for bellows factor compensation, at life size aka 1:1 add two f-stops and do a search on LFF as there has been lots of previous discussion on this.


Berince



Good inputs. Thank you everyone. So it sounds like there are no dedicated macro lenses like in the smaller formats. Bernice, that bellows extension is impressive. Lighting/metering is a whole other topic that I am going to ask about in another thread.

[Dan Fromm]

Good inputs. Thank you everyone. So it sounds like there are no dedicated macro lenses like in the smaller formats.

This depends on the magnification wanted. Bob Salomon will shortly be along to tell you about 180 and 210 mm Apo-Macro-Sironar lenses. There's also the 210/5.6 AM ED Nikkor and the 180/5.6 Makro Symmar HM. And then there are heaps of excellent process lenses that cover 8x10.

[Oren Grad]

So it sounds like there are no dedicated macro lenses like in the smaller formats.

There are. Two examples that are specified for 8x10 are the 210 mm and 300 mm Macro-Sironar-N.

[Drew Wiley]

I would functionally distinguish between tabletop closeup lenses like close-range corrected plasmat design G-Clarons from Schneider or Fujinon A's, which are highly versatile, versus very specialized lenses like Nikkor AM's, which are used for especially small things like photography of diamond rings, and are not very versatile at all. Many process lenses might also be used for up to 1:1 or so. Going smaller still, then the term "micro" versus "macro" takes over, and generally does not involve view cameras at all, but microscopes of one type or another, even if a sheet film holder is involved. But true micro setups for LF film have existed, employing many continuous Sinar rail and bellows sections mounted onto a long steel structural beam, for example.

[Oren Grad]

Bob Salomon will shortly be along to tell you about 180 and 210 mm Apo-Macro-Sironar lenses. There's also the 210/5.6 AM ED Nikkor and the 180/5.6 Makro Symmar HM. And then there are heaps of excellent process lenses that cover 8x10.

OK, so for completeness: the Apo-Macro-Sironars are 120 and 180, the Macro-Sironar-N's are 210 and 300. The Nikkor AM's are 120 and 210. And the Makro-Symmar HM's are 80, 120 and 180. The macros in 180mm and longer focal lengths cover 8x10 at 1:1.

[Bernice Loui]

Schneider M-Componon.. which is a reverse mounted Componon in shutter as supplied by Schneider. Easier in many ways to reverse mount a GOOD enlarging lens with a on-camera shutter .... like Sinar.
http://www.macrolenses.de/objektive.php?lang

Again, lighting/film flatness, set up stability and all related remains a SERIOUS problem.
IMO, never use any view camera for micro-macro images as there are FAR better ways and tools to achieve this image goal, just like telephoto images.



Bernice

[Drew Wiley]

IMO, never avoid using a really well aligned and stable view camera for micro-macro images when you know someone making a seven figure annual income doing exactly that - and I do! Or at least did ... approaching retirement, but now nearly 80, he set aside his 8x10 Sinar P's for sake of Sinar-usable digital backs, which allowed him to dismiss 2/3 of his staff, and doing the entire workflow all the way to digital pre-publication with just 3 people. He'll probably never really retire, and I can't even imagine why, already being quite wealthy, he still needs to keep making tons of money; but he obviously gets an adrenaline rush out it, and it apparently keeps him going.

Film flatness is a non-issue if you bother to find out how to actually keep it flat. If you don't, well, don't say you weren't warned about it by both me and Bernice. But having view camera movements per se, plus extreme detail capacity, is a very strong reason to shoot large format macro. Wish I had time and cash to set up a true microphotography setup too, before I'm too old to remember what a thrill microscopes were to me when I was young.

[Tin Can]

As usual, all has been done, however it still is fun to experiment

Tiny Format NIKON named it's Macro lenses as Micro until this year, I await a Z mount 105mm Macro lens

Before they all yell 'TINY Format'! I suggest studying this interesting page

Macro Photography Ideas & Inspiration (https://adaptalux.com/macro-photography-ideas-inspiration/?gclid=CjwKCAjw7--KBhAMEiwAxfpkWAq6cDKvkK7Td9tjbXLieZe6kyspzP1jq-jTANNUK4Yma3nCqtBoehoCWU8QAvD_BwE)

IR Macro and more

I forgot this

Large Format Macro Photography + Tips | Intrepid 4x5 & Dry Plates | Analog Photography (https://youtu.be/GqscQIcPzl0)

I really want a NIKON Macro Lens, from this brochere (https://www.kennethleegallery.com/pdf/Nikkor_LargeFormatLenses.pdf)

[Drew Bedo]

Kodak 2D 8x10, 210mm Caltar II N, Tri-X rated at 320.

Three Vivitar 283 strobes. Don't remember the bellows extension or correction.

Lens and strobes under 18", probably ~!12" from my face; I tripped the shutter myself directly (no cable release).

Don't recall aperture or shutter speed, but DOF is pretty shallow.

[Drew Bedo]

Around the same time as ther eye ball shot above, I did some macro work with a 5x7 and a 4x5 reducing back. In some set-ups the bellows were so extended thst I shot in a dim room with an open shutter using multiple ?pops" of 2 strobes, waiting for them to cycle each time.

[Tom Monego]

I did micro instrument photos for 2 medical text books, I used a 120 AM ED Nikkor for the photos using a Cambo 4x5. I had one photo enlarged to 3x6 ft, the lab said it was the sharpest image they had worked with, and bought a copy. I would look at the 210mm version of this lens, it probably won't cover 8x10 at infinty but will at 1:1 with a lot shorter extension than a 360mm. I am sure the APO Makro Sironar would also perform well. For lighting I used 2 or 3 1000 watt tungsten bulbs very close to the subject and diffused it with Rosco flame proof diffusing fabric.
220134

[Drew Wiley]

826257 - That's an interesting but outdated link. I've known Sasha for decades and interacted with him several times a week. I'm now retired, but ran into him a couple months ago. He was a major customer of ours, flipping his substantial photo profits into a commercial real estate development empire, which is why his photo business was actually downsized; just didn't have enough time to do it all "full time". He was originally an architecture grad from UC. He does photo work mainly just in the evenings now. I don't know about his assistants. He owned three studio-labs at one time, one of them a six story downtown high rise. His present digs are two-level, but with an enormous footprint. Calling it a deluxe studio would be an understatement. It's not open to the public anymore, just by appt.

He gave me some big enlarging equip once he shifted to scanning backs, which I use as supplemental to my own design even bigger 8x10 enlarger. But he now uses Phase One backs on 4x5 Sinars P's - yes, classic P's, not some "digital metric" version. He specialized in big Cibachromes, and had a rough transition into digital printing because it looked so anemic at first. Now he prints relatively little, and shoots mainly for foodie publications, with a gourmet kitchen right there in the studio. Eats well obviously, with famous chefs as his clients.

He still has very large print capability, but inkjets simply ain't the same as classic immaculately detailed five foot wide Cibas enlarged directly from 8x10 chrome film. Routinely working with high volume Ciba chem darn near ruined his lungs, not to mention his facilities. Maintenance expenses and hazmat licensing shot through the roof. Them were the days. And yes, he is a master at near-macro 8x10 tabletop photography. (Is Bernice listening in? - yes, I did just say, 8x10 macro). His biggest client back then was Japan Airlines, and he'd take incredibly detailed shots of sushi or whatever atop very intricate Japanese plates, and turn those into giant display prints for them, with everything in those prints well over life size.

I probably can't even count how many businesses and properties he currently owns. The penultimate multi-tasker, and remarkably, if a jack of all trades, also a master of each of them. He's made a science out of work itself, and trained his key helpers superbly. You don't want to cross him, however. We respected each other, so got along the whole time. But to him, art was meaningless; it was all about making money, even though he did very artful photos and prints. To me, the money is just a little optional icing on the cake; something else drives me entirely.