View Full Version : What’s your most “unpopular” opinion about LF?
Heroique
12-May-2022, 10:08
Don’t be shy – tell us what you believe about LF that’s bound to raise the eyebrows of your peers.
You know, the kind of opinion that provokes polite skeptics to say, “Well, everybody has a right to their opinion,” and who might add: “…but no one has the right to have their opinion taken seriously.”
Maybe it’s about darkroom technique, field or studio habits, or the reputation of cameras, lenses, tripods, meters, films, accessories.
Here’s one of mine to start!
"Not using a viewing card is the most common reason forum members miss a better composition."
-----
Please share what you believe despite the slings and arrows – maybe it will inspire others to consider new ways to make better photos. :D
Ansel Adams was just one of many quality photographers of the modernist era.
(I don't have a viewing card)
Michael R
12-May-2022, 11:27
For the vast majority of people the quality of photographs they make will generally decline with increasing format size.
Heroique
12-May-2022, 11:37
The vast majority of LFers who wander from the hiking trail need to learn how to navigate without batteries – and find out what “10 Essentials” means.
Especially the younger ones here. ;^)
The vast majority of LFers who wander from the hiking trail need to learn how to navigate without batteries – and find out what “10 Essentials” means.
Especially the younger ones here. ;^)
I would expand that to anyone who goes on a wilderness hiking trail to be honest. The headlines about missing hikers, in usually the same general area every year get tiresome.
Mark Sawyer
12-May-2022, 12:10
I don't think much of Deardorffs, which some photographers have an almost religious devotion to.
And most YouTube LF videos are full of bad information from experts who just got their first 4x5.
And I don't care for all the tricks, apps, and gadgets for figuring out "bellows extension factor". Just figure out your darned f/stop! It's a simple fraction, one-step third grade math!
But I've mostly learned to keep my mouth shut.
Mostly...
Wollensak made excellent lenses.
The only opinion that I have regarding LF that is unpopular with other people (if I'm interpreting the question correctly) is that I can get much better photographs than they can with their $10,000 digital camera -- BUT that only applies to people that have the latest and greatest $10,000 digital cameras.
ic-racer
12-May-2022, 15:50
In the big picture of things, large format photography is not very common. Likewise nothing mentioned here matters.
The technical quality of LF photography when it comes down to finished prints was matched by common digital imaging tools at least 10 years ago.
Michael R
12-May-2022, 17:20
Indeed. But don’t tell Drew W.
The technical quality of LF photography when it comes down to finished prints was matched by common digital imaging tools at least 10 years ago.
The technical quality of LF photography when it comes down to finished prints was matched by common digital imaging tools at least 10 years ago.
With exceptions, of course. And I would prefer 'equaled' rather than 'matched'. The quality is as high, but different.
If the OP's question was about one's most biased opinion, mine would be that it's damn difficult to beat a contact print.
But my opinions that seem to be unpopular...
3) Viewing the upside down image on the GG can help one to compose.
2) When I correct others who say the image we see on the GG is upside down and backwards. It is not backwards. No one ever thanks me for pointing that out.
1) It is okay not to crop.
djdister
12-May-2022, 19:32
One must always print to display the the full rebate, notches and film clip marks, otherwise it's not truly LF.
Heroique
12-May-2022, 19:58
The 150mm is an extremely exciting lens to use for 4x5 landscapes.
abruzzi
12-May-2022, 20:04
tha main reason to shoot LF is so the people with you get frustrated at the time it takes and leave you behind, so you can spend as much time on your shots as you want without feeling rushed.
The 150mm is an extremely exciting lens to use for 4x5 landscapes.
I like this. If one says 150mm, others will say vanilla. Not a popular 4x5 focal length, but should be.
sharktooth
12-May-2022, 20:45
2) When I correct others who say the image we see on the GG is upside down and backwards. It is not backwards. No one ever thanks me for pointing that out.
Hey, you're right, it is just turned upside down. Thanks, man. The only time it's backwards is if you're viewing from the lens side (like having positive paper in the film holder)
You're welcome! :cool: My printing process (single transfer carbons) also reverses the image so I need to be aware of that when working with the image on the GG. I mentally flip the image around an axis running horizontally across the center of the glass, turning it right-side up and backwards. For platinum prints I just mentally spin the image on the GG 180 degrees on its same plane...turning it right-side up without reversing the image.
people who do large format photography make it seem as if it is really difficult, like there is some sort of mystique about it and think just because they use a sheet film camera that somehow their photographs are better than someone's iPhone photograph, when the only difference might be that it took the large format photographer 45 minutes to set up the photograph and what they wanted to take a picture of moved, they took a picture of something else instead and they had a great (better?) story to tell and better more interesting clouds. But unfortunately they can't share the photograph with friends and family because they might not like digital sharing techniques, or the digital exchange doesn't show their blacks to be black hole-y enough.
But I've mostly learned to keep my mouth shut.
Mostly...
im trying and have trouble mostly ..
Drew Bedo
13-May-2022, 07:21
Sure an LF camera is a tool to be used, but I view the older wooden cameras heirlooms to be conserved for the future use of others. My view is that we do not actually own that Ansco, 2D or 'Dorff. In my view we should consider ourselves to be stewards of a photographic instrument that will never be made again. Yes, there are current production view cameras, but that B&J, grey painted and clunky or that Kodak or Ansco with awkward or limited movements are usable antiques. My Eastman View No. 2D was crafted before I was born. Thes older view cameras to be used and maintained fro photographers, perhaps not yet born. The 2D? I just have it on loan for these few years.
John Layton
13-May-2022, 07:35
That theoretical diffraction limitation does not really become evident (even in very large prints) until apertures of at least one stop smaller (and sometimes two stops) than those commonly "acknowledged" on most forums, including this one.
To the extent that diffraction might be measured scientifically does not always equate to visible results.
Moreover, I feel that it is the quality of the lens itself, in terms of design, and execution of manufacture (grinding, coating, accuracy of element centering, etc.) plus the overall history and condition of a particular lens, which may or may not leave it vulnerable to displaying actually visible effects of diffraction much sooner than would be noticed in a "better" lens.
In other words (for example) - not all 120mm LF lenses are equal at F/45!
There...I said it...whew! :D
nitroplait
13-May-2022, 07:38
Spotmeters are overrated.
Serge S
13-May-2022, 07:44
Yep - that's what they say about antiques - we care for them for the next generation.
They can be functional or / and beautiful or /and carefully crafted which all adds to appreciation.
Sure an LF camera is a tool to be used, but I view the older wooden cameras heirlooms to be conserved for the future use of others. My view is that we do not actually own that Ansco, 2D or 'Dorff. In my view we should consider ourselves to be stewards of a photographic instrument that will never be made again. Yes, there are current production view cameras, but that B&J, grey painted and clunky or that Kodak or Ansco with awkward or limited movements are usable antiques. My Eastman View No. 2D was crafted before I was born. Thes older view cameras to be used and maintained fro photographers, perhaps not yet born. The 2D? I just have it on loan for these few years.
Serge S
13-May-2022, 07:47
That's why I've found it's good to try something to see how it works out - as you may be presently surprised as I have when the theory or opinion does not show up in the real world.
That theoretical diffraction limitation does not really become evident (even in very large prints) until apertures of at least one stop smaller (and sometimes two stops) than those commonly "acknowledged" on most forums, including this one.
To the extent that diffraction might be measured scientifically does not always equate to visible results.
Moreover, I feel that it is the quality of the lens itself, in terms of design, and execution of manufacture (grinding, coating, accuracy of element centering, etc.) plus the overall history and condition of a particular lens, which may or may not leave it vulnerable to displaying actually visible effects of diffraction much sooner than would be noticed in a "better" lens.
In other words (for example) - not all 120mm LF lenses are equal at F/45!
There...I said it...whew! :D
Tin Can
13-May-2022, 08:24
Most 'Museum quality' LF cameras are garbage if in a museum.
Alan Klein
13-May-2022, 08:33
I think Sillverfast and Vuescan are overrated and not worth the money. Stick with free Epsonscan.
Heroique
13-May-2022, 09:05
As a 4x5 landscape lens, the Schneider 150mm g-claron performs beautifully wider than f/22, even producing lovely bokeh at its widest (f/9) for closer shots.
Spotmeters are overrated.
As are focus cloths, meters in general, tripod heads, loupes, and lens shades. And usually the photographer...
John Layton
13-May-2022, 09:52
Here's an admission...that, depending on the nature of light and subject matter, there are times when the image on my (Maxwell) GG is so bright and "snappy" that I absolutely do not need a focussing cloth - but I will use it anyway to avoid looking like a total noob!
There...I said that also...whew! :o (thanks Vaughn!)
ps...although maybe a dark cloth also helps to keep me from getting distracted by other stuff happening around me - some of which might be lethal! (true story which I will share sometime)
Here's an admission...that, depending on the nature of light and subject matter, there are times when the image on my (Maxwell) GG is so bright and "snappy" that I absolutely do not need a focussing cloth - but I will use it anyway to avoid looking like a total noob!
There...I said that also...whew! :o (thanks Vaughn!)
ps...although maybe a dark cloth also helps to keep me from getting distracted by other stuff happening around me - some of which might be lethal! (true story which I will share sometime)
One warm December day, I decided to stay out and photograph the rising lunar eclipse in Saguaro National Park while wearing shorts and a light shirt. The wool cap I kept stashed in my camera bag, my 'heavy' Calument darkcloth around my shoulders, and dancing around between exposures is what kept me warm. Hey...here is a free idea that someone might make a few bucks on. A Gortex, insulated darkcloth with a slit in the middle to wear as an emeregency poncho. :cool: Invest now and you'll have something to keep you warm when you lose your shirt.
Heroique
13-May-2022, 10:37
Many say they love LF because it helps them enjoy nature.
Here’s one of my most unpopular responses…
Concentrating on composition, focus, or metering dulls those senses not directly related to the task, preventing one from experiencing nature to its fullest. However, waiting patiently for a persistent wind to subside after set-up can open-up the possibility … unless you’re one of those who curse the breeze!
A hobby of grumpy old men that have an obsession with getting the final great greyscale with static scenes that have already been done a Thousand times. LF is the least powerfull of all formats in catching the decisive moment and this results in dull images.
Ah, but composing is opening one's senses up to nature at its fullest, and every moment is divisive. Whoops, decisive. Where's Freud?
Heroique
13-May-2022, 11:28
Ah, but composing is opening one's senses up to nature at its fullest, and every moment is divisive. Whoops, decisive. Where's Freud?
That reminds me of another personal belief that's bound to be unpopular!
To a greater or lesser degree, every landscape image illustrates the photographer’s most pressing unconscious concerns, often (but not always) sexual in nature.
That reminds me of another personal belief that's bound to be unpopular!
To a greater or lesser degree, every landscape image illustrates the photographer’s most pressing unconscious concerns, often but not always sexual in nature.
That's unpopular?! Certainly not with the "Every photograph is a self-portrait" crowd! (waving my hand amongst the redwoods)
To a greater or lesser degree, what does every photograph of a female nude by a male illustrate about the photographers' most pressing unconscious concerns? (and one can remove the gender identifications and still have it be an valid and unpopular belief, I suppose)
:cool:
Heroique
13-May-2022, 12:02
That's unpopular?!
I suspect my belief would be unpopular among LFers who think a tree is just a tree, but we might have more Freudians here than I thought! :D
How about, in order to make a panorama, you have to use a panoramic camera (or filmback).
Doremus Scudder
13-May-2022, 13:29
... Hey...here is a free idea that someone might make a few bucks on. A Gortex, insulated darkcloth with a slit in the middle to wear as an emergency poncho. :cool: Invest now and you'll have something to keep you warm when you lose your shirt.
Well, mine doesn't have a slit, but fills all the other requirements. Home made, white GoreTex on the outside (waterproof, reflectant and cool in the sun), black and non-slip on the inside with Velcro all around the edges so I can make a poncho easily (or a Superman cape, or whatever...). Not insulated, per se, but two layers and thick.
As for my "unpopular" opinions (most of which have been expressed here before):
"Technique" for its own sake is pointless - the most important thing in any photography is what we point the camera at. Our technique only needs to be as good as our vision.
The Zone System is really a tool for visualizing the final print, not for figuring exposure/development (though that gets included, of necessity).
As hard as we try to be precise about metering, developing, etc., the system is more forgiving that we give it credit for; the window to hit and still get a great print is pretty large. The number of good prints I have from technically "bad" negatives proves this (this doesn't mean we shouldn't try, though...)
The main advantage of LF photography is camera movements, not film size.
Metering through filters with a handheld meter is just fine and just as accurate as applying factors, more so if we test a bit and calibrate.
Viewing the image carefully on the ground glass is often not needed at all. Often I just make sure the image is all in there somewhere and focus on a couple pre-chosen points without ever seeing the image in its entirety on the ground glass.
Diffraction degradation is preferable to unwanted out-of-focus areas in just about every case. Quit worrying and just stop down if you need to!
Unless you have a huge camera, contact prints are just too small. 8x10 is just too small for a sweeping landscape. If you can't enlarge your 8x10 negative, get a bigger camera, or get a smaller one and an enlarger.
Lighter-weight tripods are just fine for larger cameras in most situations. As long as it doesn't collapse under the weight of the camera and will hold things still, there's no problem. Just don't photograph in windstorms and earthquakes and you'll be fine and your back will thank you for it.
Glass negative carriers are a PITA. I only use mine when I really need to.
... All for now
Doremus
The main advantage of LF photography is film size, not camera movements. (apologies Mr. Scudder)
no, No, NO!
Buy one lens!
Use one lens!
You only need one lens!
(two at the most)
Doremus Scudder
13-May-2022, 16:14
The main advantage of LF photography is film size, not camera movements. (apologies Mr. Scudder)
no, No, NO!
Buy one lens!
Use one lens!
You only need one lens!
(two at the most)
Ha! No apologies necessary. Still, I don't think I'd want a large-format camera without movements.
But really, I have to carry four or five lenses minimum! Really (although sometimes I only use one or two... :)
Doremus
Hang matted and framed 8x10 prints on the wall of a gallery. One Digital, one fiber based, the third a hand coated Platinum/Palladium. When viewed from about 4 feet away "most people should be able to tell the difference".... did just that a few years ago. Gallery visitors universally couldn't tell the difference. Several other photographers couldn't tell the differences and two of them have printed with the three different mediums. Visiting Photo professor correctly ID'd each of the three printing processes, but confided in me that he had to view the prints very close up to see the differences.
Doremus Scudder
13-May-2022, 16:18
How about, in order to make a panorama, you have to use a panoramic camera (or filmback).
Heck, I just use scissors to cut my 4x5 neg down to panorama to get a 12cm x whatever (depends on how thin I cut it...). Or, sometimes, I just crop when enlarging.
Doremus
Doremus Scudder
13-May-2022, 16:19
Hang matted and framed 8x10 prints on the wall of a gallery. One Digital, one fiber based, the third a hand coated Platinum/Palladium. When viewed from about 4 feet away "most people should be able to tell the difference".... did just that a few years ago. Gallery visitors universally couldn't tell the difference. Several other photographers couldn't tell the differences and two of them have printed with the three different mediums. Visiting Photo professor correctly ID'd each of the three printing processes, but confided in me that he had to view the prints very close up to see the differences.
You mean to say that content is more important than the medium??? How dare you!! :)
You mean to say that content is more important than the medium??? How dare you!! :)
:-)
abruzzi
13-May-2022, 16:58
the zone system is usually overkill
interneg
13-May-2022, 17:08
Making a technically competent image with 4x5 or 8x10 (for a 2-3x enlargement) is actually really easy - if you don't spend all your time imaging grey cards while purposely failing to understand basic sensitometry and worrying that the film manufacturers somehow have it in for you.
ic-racer
13-May-2022, 17:11
I like this. If one says 150mm, others will say vanilla. Not a popular 4x5 focal length, but should be.
I shoot almost all my 4x5 with a 150 lens. I can't tell what posts are sarcasm or not.
Nodda Duma
13-May-2022, 19:01
As a lens designer… Most truths about optics that fly in the face of optical myths. I don’t remember specific examples, but it happens from time to time.
-Jason
The technical quality of LF photography when it comes down to finished prints was matched by common digital imaging tools at least 10 years ago.
Corollary: LF since then is performance art, for the most part.
Witness the exodus of a number of photographers from this site, leaving mostly hobbyists and some digital shooters dealing with nostalgia.
Sure an LF camera is a tool to be used, but I view the older wooden cameras heirlooms to be conserved for the future use of others. My view is that we do not actually own that Ansco, 2D or 'Dorff. In my view we should consider ourselves to be stewards of a photographic instrument that will never be made again. Yes, there are current production view cameras, but that B&J, grey painted and clunky or that Kodak or Ansco with awkward or limited movements are usable antiques. My Eastman View No. 2D was crafted before I was born. Thes older view cameras to be used and maintained fro photographers, perhaps not yet born. The 2D? I just have it on loan for these few years.
This has been my view on lenses especially for some years. We do not own these lenses, we are merely caretakers and we need to diligently preserve them for posterity. I also think we should pass them on before we die so they don't end up in dumpsters.
Here’s one of mine to start!
"Not using a viewing card is the most common reason forum members miss a better composition."
Is that what they used to use in the old days before smartphones?
:)
227258
I shoot almost all my 4x5 with a 150 lens. I can't tell what posts are sarcasm or not.
Yeah -- some folks seem to be sliding into sarcasm, but I'm going with what the OP asked for -- one's own beliefs/opinions about LF that are not popular with other LF'ers. 150mm on 4x5 is sweet.
Actually, my favorite opinion that does not fly well here is that focal length determines perspective. Simply because to get a specific image the focal length of the lens determines where one sets up the camera for that image, and since position of the camera gives you a certain perspective, focal length thus determines that perspective. Seems logical to me; if Y, then X. If X then Z. Therefore if Y, then Z.
Well, mine doesn't have a slit, but fills all the other requirements. Home made, white GoreTex on the outside (waterproof, reflectant and cool in the sun), black and non-slip on the inside with Velcro all around the edges so I can make a poncho easily (or a Superman cape, or whatever...). Not insulated, per se, but two layers and thick.
As for my "unpopular" opinions (most of which have been expressed here before):
"Technique" for its own sake is pointless - the most important thing in any photography is what we point the camera at. Our technique only needs to be as good as our vision.
The Zone System is really a tool for visualizing the final print, not for figuring exposure/development (though that gets included, of necessity).
As hard as we try to be precise about metering, developing, etc., the system is more forgiving that we give it credit for; the window to hit and still get a great print is pretty large. The number of good prints I have from technically "bad" negatives proves this (this doesn't mean we shouldn't try, though...)
The main advantage of LF photography is camera movements, not film size.
Metering through filters with a handheld meter is just fine and just as accurate as applying factors, more so if we test a bit and calibrate.
Viewing the image carefully on the ground glass is often not needed at all. Often I just make sure the image is all in there somewhere and focus on a couple pre-chosen points without ever seeing the image in its entirety on the ground glass.
Diffraction degradation is preferable to unwanted out-of-focus areas in just about every case. Quit worrying and just stop down if you need to!
Unless you have a huge camera, contact prints are just too small. 8x10 is just too small for a sweeping landscape. If you can't enlarge your 8x10 negative, get a bigger camera, or get a smaller one and an enlarger.
Lighter-weight tripods are just fine for larger cameras in most situations. As long as it doesn't collapse under the weight of the camera and will hold things still, there's no problem. Just don't photograph in windstorms and earthquakes and you'll be fine and your back will thank you for it.
Glass negative carriers are a PITA. I only use mine when I really need to.
... All for now
Doremus
These are all very popular statements for me
Heroique
14-May-2022, 02:09
Yeah -- some folks seem to be sliding into sarcasm, but I'm going with what the OP asked for -- one's own beliefs/opinions about LF that are not popular with other LF'ers. 150mm on 4x5 is sweet.
People here will notice my enthusiasm when I post images taken with my 150mm g-claron – it is a “sweet” lens indeed. And I mean not just the lens, but the FL.
Its normalcy often proves its superpower to me, even if others only see Clark Kent.
Actually, my favorite opinion that does not fly well here is that focal length determines perspective…
I can see why your claim would cause tomatoes to be thrown! But your clarification might calm the crowds.
Which reminds me, describing what produces a change in (viewpoint) perspective is, I think, responsible for countless unpopular statements on this forum. Some right, some wrong. I remember one LFer who wouldn’t budge from his unpopular opinion that back shift changes perspective, even after pages of polite and eloquent replies that tried to show otherwise.
Tin Can
14-May-2022, 02:24
How do we know when to die
This has been my view on lenses especially for some years. We do not own these lenses, we are merely caretakers and we need to diligently preserve them for posterity. I also think we should pass them on before we die so they don't end up in dumpsters.
How do we know when to die
That is the crux of the matter. When is it time to let go? All I can say is that I'm not there yet.
John Layton
14-May-2022, 03:19
"Pass them along before we die..." This resonates. Thinking about how much money I'd lost last year when I let my Hasselblad gear go to a dealer (a very reputable one...and no disrespect), it almost makes sense to just give this stuff away - but (and here's the rub that might make this yet another "unpopular" opinion)...this "free" gear should go to those who truly deserve it the most, with the methodology to make such an evaluation left up to the giver of the equipment. In my case I think it would amount to requiring an essay (in the case of a beginner), or maybe a project proposal from someone more "advanced" and needing specific gear (but who cannot otherwise afford it), along with some supporting documentation (and maybe photos) and proof of "need." Yeah...I know...this may seem a bit "power-trippy," but I would hate to just give truly high quality gear away to someone, for example, who just wanted it as "bling" and nothing else.
Tin Can
14-May-2022, 04:03
People gift LF to me now and then
I have given way more away
Yet ALL 'givens' from me to actual young photographers are now discarded
Since our end of life is unknown, we can wait and never see what happens, no hurry my friends
:cool::o:)
.. the focal length of the lens determines where one sets up the camera for that image...
Interesting. For me, it's the opposite -- where I set up the camera determines what focal length lens I will use.
Interesting. For me, it's the opposite -- where I set up the camera determines what focal length lens I will use.
I think a lot has to do with how one approaches making images. Using only one lens per format for decades has trained me to make the most of my lens decisions prior to determining where the camera will be. One of many ways of working.
Kevin Crisp
14-May-2022, 09:20
I've got two that come immediately to mind:
1. If you buy a good incident meter and learn to use it you won't have any trouble properly exposing film. And you'll get your exposure faster.
2. Pre-soaking doesn't actually do anything to make development more even. How can it? If I push a dry sheet of film down into the developer, the difference in wet time from one part of the film to the next is (perhaps) one second. You are NEVER going to see (or measure) the fact that this cm or that got 1 second more time in the developer. If you push already wet (presoaked) film down into the developer, parts of the sheet get developer ever so slightly faster that other parts. Same difference.
interneg
14-May-2022, 10:06
Deana Lawson is more representative of today's LF camera users than the people on here wasting all their time worrying themselves silly about camera movements, film prices and irrelevant film vs digital 'comparisons'.
Kevin Crisp
14-May-2022, 11:02
I'll add another:
- You could have taken that one if all you had was a Crown Graphic.
Sal Santamaura
14-May-2022, 11:16
The technical quality of LF photography when it comes down to finished prints was matched by common digital imaging tools at least 10 years ago.
Yup. Except it would be more accurate to replace "matched" with "exceeded."
Indeed. But don’t tell Drew W.
Oh, go ahead, tell him. :)
Nonetheless, I'm looking forward to some day making Large Format photographs using an LSX45 back
http://largesense.com/index.php/products/4x5-mega-pixel-monster-large-format-digital
on my Graflok-equipped cameras and posting about them here in categories other than The Lounge. Do tell Drew W that too!
By the way, when signing up with LARGESENSE for updates about the LSX45, I included a note saying that 300 MegaPixels would be "adequate." No need for 500. :D
Michael R
14-May-2022, 11:22
Nonetheless, I'm looking forward to some day making Large Format photographs using an LSX45 back
http://largesense.com/index.php/products/4x5-mega-pixel-monster-large-format-digital
on my Graflok-equipped cameras and posting about them here in categories other than The Lounge. Do tell Drew W that too!
By the way, when signing up with LARGESENSE for updates about the LSX45, I included a note saying that 300 MegaPixels would be "adequate." No need for 500. :D
What would be really nifty is if this thing could be combined with the 4x5 AF system that other guy came up with. I think it’s somewhere on here.
Bernice Loui
14-May-2022, 11:37
Deana Lawson's work could be done with any digital camera or film camera, her work is much about expressive content. Using a view camera is part of performance art as a means to engage the humanity she is working with.
~This is not new, it has been done over the long history of photography. Deana Lawson's work should be a reminder of the Importance of expressive image content in place of technical "perfection".
Bernice
Deana Lawson is more representative of today's LF camera users than the people on here wasting all their time worrying themselves silly about camera movements, film prices and irrelevant film vs digital 'comparisons'.
Ben Calwell
14-May-2022, 11:39
Most unpopular opinion? That using a view camera is really cool. I quit believing that when DSLR photographers started looking at me, not with admiration, but with the kind of pitiful gaze reserved for those who are hopelessly behind the times.
Sal Santamaura
14-May-2022, 11:47
What would be really nifty is if this thing could be combined with the 4x5 AF system that other guy came up with. I think it’s somewhere on here.
Nah, no need for autofocus. I even use my D810 like a view camera, on a tripod, live view, magnifier zooming the display in/out around the ground glass the same as a loupe, manually focusing to perfection. :)
Bernice Loui
14-May-2022, 11:51
This could be a really long list as a reflection of how much folks that apply sheet film to create images today -vs- from years ago when film was "it".
IMO, there are SO many web and YouTube content creators that have limited experience with what sheet film once was, then project their limited experience as data media content which can become overly influential of what this sheet film view camera stuff really is or once was.
There is now an entire Foto culture of "Ansel Adams" wanna be's, coupled with the outdoor adventures of hiking-camping and all that. Add to this the revival of alternative process image making.. It's all good, if not for this interest in sheet film stuff, sheet film view camera as a means of image making would have died years ago.
Discussion and appreciation of well developed techniques, understanding, wisdom of what makes painting and related art creations is not often appreciated enough by Fotographers.. to do the study, understanding and how what has been gained in the past of what works and what does not work in artistic art creations is discounted under the guise of "creative self expression".. ~Yes folks, there are very real reasons why some artistic creations endure the test of time, ponder why?
This discussion ties into two previous LFF discussions:
How did we come to LF.
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?98688-How-Did-We-Come-To-LF
Why LF.
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?151972-Why-Large-Format
Bernice
Michael R
14-May-2022, 11:54
I also use my 35mm camera(s) the same way I use a view camera. It’s just that since I’m almost always under low light conditions I don’t see anywhere near as well on a 4x5 ground glass as I do through a small format viewfinder, so LF focusing for me has always been hard without an aid of some sort.
Nah, no need for autofocus. I even use my D810 like a view camera, on a tripod, live view, magnifier zooming the display in/out around the ground glass the same as a loupe, manually focusing to perfection. :)
Bernice Loui
14-May-2022, 11:56
Not every individual has the ability to Pre-visualize. The ability to do this is rooted in spatial ability within the mind-brain. For those born with this gift of spatial ability, it still needs to be developed. For those without this ability, they will need to develop different means, methods, tools to achieve some degree of pre-visualization.
Bernice
Previsualization is a reality. One chooses both tripod placement and choice of lens after considering the scene visually before set up, no? Having said that, a corollary to Vaughn's single lens concept is to choose one lens to work with when venturing into new territory and explore forcing oneself to see with that AOV. It imposes a discipline which inevitably will provide s freedom of visual acuity. Perhaps compare it to choice of golf club to perform in a certain way, or to learn bird songs to accentuate one's ability to identify a species (a somewhat useless skill but for he fact that I cannot help myself as it is innate, being musically inclined).
Bernice Loui
14-May-2022, 11:58
_?_ Flat field lenses should not be used to render image subjects that are 3D, myth or fact _?_
Bernice
As a lens designer… Most truths about optics that fly in the face of optical myths. I don’t remember specific examples, but it happens from time to time.
-Jason
Bernice Loui
14-May-2022, 12:03
Significant amount of Freud's work has been dis-proven or significantly altered. Much of what Freud published would never pass current rigor of Scientific paper publishing today.
Bernice
Ah, but composing is opening one's senses up to nature at its fullest, and every moment is divisive. Whoops, decisive. Where's Freud?
Sal Santamaura
14-May-2022, 12:14
I also use my 35mm camera(s) the same way I use a view camera. It’s just that since I’m almost always under low light conditions I don’t see anywhere near as well on a 4x5 ground glass as I do through a small format viewfinder, so LF focusing for me has always been hard without an aid of some sort.
If the LSX45 has live view as described on the LARGESENSE Web page, even at native ISO 50, your problem will be solved. Despite some visual noise, manual focus is easy to achieve in low ambient light using the LCD screen. That's been my experience with the D810 at native ISO 64.
What would be really nifty is if this thing could be combined with the 4x5 AF system that other guy came up with. I think it’s somewhere on here.
This is becoming a big issue in cinematography. The conventional position is that "cinema cameras" continue to be manual focus by design and that autofocus is inferior. Give it another five years, and I think that autofocus will be standard in cameras used for professional filmmaking, but not without a lot of bellyaching first :)
Significant amount of Freud's work has been dis-proven or significantly altered. Much of what Freud published would never pass current rigor of Scientific paper publishing today.
Bernice
What he did accomplish was to put labels on human emotional processes -- so that we were finally able to start talking about them rationally. Kind of like the first blind man describing an elephant from touching it -- not too accurate, but at least a start. Even Darwin didn't actually know what was going on regarding evolution -- he didn't understand the various processes involved in evolution -- but he sure got the ball rolling.
Michael R
14-May-2022, 14:11
Also, the term pre-visualization makes no sense.
In some ways "post-visualization" makes more sense.
gazing in someone else's navel is the same as walking a mile in their shoes ..
Also, the term pre-visualization makes no sense.
It is a fancy word for imagining what you would like your image to look like. Design might be a better word.
Michael R
14-May-2022, 15:43
Yes, it’s visualization. Pre-visualization is like I got out of bed this morning before I visualized something.
It is a fancy word for imagining what you would like your image to look like. Design might be a better word.
Doremus Scudder
14-May-2022, 16:49
Most unpopular opinion? That using a view camera is really cool. I quit believing that when DSLR photographers started looking at me, not with admiration, but with the kind of pitiful gaze reserved for those who are hopelessly behind the times.
Oh boy, does that ring true for me!
I remember working in the Steens Mt. area in Oregon once when a group of photography students from the University of Oregon came by with their Holgas and digicams (with their instructor too, I might add). They though I was out of earshot, but I could clearly hear the disparaging remarks from, "what a dinosaur," "who does he think he is anyway, Ansel Adams?" etc., etc. I'm still angry.
Doremus
It works the other way too.
I was once at the famous GOOSENECKS overlook in Utah -- very very early one morning. Trying to get a shot under the perfect sunrise. I was all alone -- or so I thought. A little old lady came up from behind and asked, "Are you Ansel Adams?"
She was NOT kidding.
Sal Santamaura
14-May-2022, 17:04
Also, the term pre-visualization makes no sense.
...it’s visualization...
Yes, but I predict you'll have no more luck correcting that than I've had helping people transcend their persistent use of the meaningless word "art." :)
It works the other way too.
I was once at the famous GOOSENECKS overlook in Utah -- very very early one morning. Trying to get a shot under the perfect sunrise. I was all alone -- or so I thought. A little old lady came up from behind and asked, "Are you Ansel Adams?"
She was NOT kidding.
The average National Park visitors are in awe of LF cameras....they'll line up to be able to have a turn under the darkcloth. During my AIR in Zion NP, some of the most appreciative comments I got were for 20-somethings.
I would not worry about the anti-LF mumblings of digital camera users. They are most likely trying to justify the big bucks their equipment costs and the thought of the 10000 images they'll have to go through when they get home. If the digital camera users are thinking photographers, they'll appreciate and respect how other photographers work.
Sal Santamaura
14-May-2022, 18:04
...I would not worry about the anti-LF mumblings of digital camera users. They are most likely trying to justify the big bucks their equipment costs and the thought of the 10000 images they'll have to go through when they get home...
Not all photographers using DSLRs are the same. I record only a few more images on memory cards than sheets of film exposed at the same/similar locations. I've spent no more than five minutes each time selecting the optimum frame from those handfuls of files.
...I...use my D810 like a view camera, on a tripod, live view, magnifier zooming the display in/out around the ground glass the same as a loupe, manually focusing...
Richard Wasserman
14-May-2022, 18:28
Oh boy, does that ring true for me!
I remember working in the Steens Mt. area in Oregon once when a group of photography students from the University of Oregon came by with their Holgas and digicams (with their instructor too, I might add). They though I was out of earshot, but I could clearly hear the disparaging remarks from, "what a dinosaur," "who does he think he is anyway, Ansel Adams?" etc., etc. I'm still angry.
Doremus
I just had the opposite occur. I was out yesterday photographing with my 4x5 Chamonix in an industrial area near a fright train yard, and a 20ish man was paying attention to what I was doing, but from a distance. I waved and he waved back and he came over to chat. He was heavily tattooed—arms, neck, face (not that that really relevant)—and was the sweetest guy I've met in a while. He recently bought a Minolta SLR and was excited that I was shooting film. His girlfriend came over to join us and she was equally enthusiastic, and asked me to photograph them kissing near a train. We all had a great time!
John Kasaian
14-May-2022, 20:16
Hmmmmm.....I'll play.
1) That a print that you make with your hands using manual tools is different than a print that comes out of a machine because the energy comes from your own hands.
2) That traditional LF photography can be worth the pursuit just because it is something you enjoy doing, not dependent on any perceived improvement over later technologies
Alan Klein
15-May-2022, 05:57
"Pass them along before we die..." This resonates. Thinking about how much money I'd lost last year when I let my Hasselblad gear go to a dealer (a very reputable one...and no disrespect), it almost makes sense to just give this stuff away - but (and here's the rub that might make this yet another "unpopular" opinion)...this "free" gear should go to those who truly deserve it the most, with the methodology to make such an evaluation left up to the giver of the equipment. In my case I think it would amount to requiring an essay (in the case of a beginner), or maybe a project proposal from someone more "advanced" and needing specific gear (but who cannot otherwise afford it), along with some supporting documentation (and maybe photos) and proof of "need." Yeah...I know...this may seem a bit "power-trippy," but I would hate to just give truly high quality gear away to someone, for example, who just wanted it as "bling" and nothing else.
Living in a 55+ retirement community, I know loads of other older people here have probably thrown most of the film stuff out. Some have kept it especially the more expensive stuff like Leica's. Half the people here don;t even know film is still being used. Most are using digital, happily, and have moved on. It's the young mainly who have taken up film and keeping it going. I have a friend who donated his darkroom to a film student at a local college. But that was 15 years ago and I;m not sure the college does film any more.
Put it in your will I suppose. But realistically, is your family going to bother trying to sell it unless it;s really worth a lot? A yard sale with other crap?
Alan Klein
15-May-2022, 06:07
Previsualization is a reality. One chooses both tripod placement and choice of lens after considering the scene visually before set up, no? Having said that, a corollary to Vaughn's single lens concept is to choose one lens to work with when venturing into new territory and explore forcing oneself to see with that AOV. It imposes a discipline which inevitably will provide s freedom of visual acuity. Perhaps compare it to choice of golf club to perform in a certain way, or to learn bird songs to accentuate one's ability to identify a species (a somewhat useless skill but for he fact that I cannot help myself as it is innate, being musically inclined).
Don't oil paint artists decide where to put the subject effectively deciding which lens angle to use? Sculptors? Why should photographers have any less choice?
Alan Klein
15-May-2022, 06:12
Deana Lawson's work could be done with any digital camera or film camera, her work is much about expressive content. Using a view camera is part of performance art as a means to engage the humanity she is working with.
~This is not new, it has been done over the long history of photography. Deana Lawson's work should be a reminder of the Importance of expressive image content in place of technical "perfection".
Bernice
I wonder if using a LF camera makes it seem the photographer is giving special attention to their work? That they're serious about what they're doing. That helps the subjects be more serious as well in responding more expressively.
Daniel Unkefer
15-May-2022, 06:21
Monorail cameras are too heavy and wood folders are better for use in the field
Alan Klein
15-May-2022, 06:25
Oh boy, does that ring true for me!
I remember working in the Steens Mt. area in Oregon once when a group of photography students from the University of Oregon came by with their Holgas and digicams (with their instructor too, I might add). They though I was out of earshot, but I could clearly hear the disparaging remarks from, "what a dinosaur," "who does he think he is anyway, Ansel Adams?" etc., etc. I'm still angry.
Doremus
Most regular people don't act that way. I've found they're interested in what I'm doing. Often excited and very curious. Of course, they may go home and tell their friends about the old photographer they saw on the trail. But I am an old photographer. ;)
Alan Klein
15-May-2022, 06:28
It works the other way too.
I was once at the famous GOOSENECKS overlook in Utah -- very very early one morning. Trying to get a shot under the perfect sunrise. I was all alone -- or so I thought. A little old lady came up from behind and asked, "Are you Ansel Adams?"
She was NOT kidding.
You had to say "Yes." You would have made her day. What's wrong with you? ;)
You had to say "Yes." You would have made her day. What's wrong with you? ;)
I never said that I denied being Mr. Adams.
John Layton
15-May-2022, 06:56
I can remember the first time I had my first (giant, DIY sliding-box) 11x14 camera out on location at Pemaquid Point, Maine. Boy, what a bear even then...getting this thing, along with my Quick-Set "Gibraltar" tripod out onto the rocks!
At any rate...it wasn't long after I'd gotten it set up that another gentleman of about my age (mid-30's at that time), approached me and just gave me the business...as in, "what...you think that you are taking the worlds best photograph? Who do you think you are, anyway?" and he went on and on like this, would not leave me alone - could not believe it!
Don't oil paint artists decide where to put the subject effectively deciding which lens angle to use? Sculptors? Why should photographers have any less choice?
plenty of painters and sculptors don't pre visualize ... Because of "free will" ..
I wonder if using a LF camera makes it seem the photographer is giving special attention to their work? That they're serious about what they're doing. That helps the subjects be more serious as well in responding more expressively.
I think anyone who considers themself a "photographer" gives special attention to their work, including people who use cellphones ( and 100 years ago brownies and folders &c) people who don't use a light meter, don't pre visualize and who shoot sheet film from the hip.
( no rules )
pdmoylan
15-May-2022, 07:46
Depth perspective was first used in the 14th century by several European artists and was used extensively during the Renaissance. But the artists are not necessarily using a perspective that adheres to a specific lens AOV. The portrait of a person may have a perspective in a “normal” range while the background may suggest a super wide angle. Take Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa for example where this is pretty obvious. There is no lens that can simultaneously produce her portrait without any linear distortion where the background is a cityscape.
Freedom to create comes from discipline which means initially limiting choices but “breaking out” as vision and skill mature. You have to take years of boring piano lessons to play Bach’s Goldberg Variations. Too many examples in history which support the idea that freedom is creating within a discipline - breaking the rules without breaking the law, so to speak.
Ideally photography should not confine itself to a self absorbing hobby but a way of communicating something individual about the subject and the photographer. .
Sal Santamaura
15-May-2022, 08:17
...photography should not confine itself to a self absorbing hobby but a way of communicating something individual about the subject and the photographer. .
Aw, you're full 'o should. :)
How about "photography SHOULD be fun!!!"
How about "photography can be down right miserable."
Great experiences and memories, but times that were in no way, fun.
Doremus Scudder
15-May-2022, 10:47
Don't oil paint artists decide where to put the subject effectively deciding which lens angle to use? Sculptors? Why should photographers have any less choice?
Last I heard, painters didn't use lenses (unless you count the paint-from-photo crowd and still, they don't always use the entire photo for their work, but do, of necessity, use the photographer's viewpoint).
Choosing your viewpoint determines the relative positions and sizes of objects in the scene - that's perspective. Choosing how much of that scene you want to fit on your canvas is called framing, which corresponds to lens choice for photographers.
Set up your camera in a spot. Take six photos with six different lenses. All will have the same perspective; just the framing will be different. Note that all six could be duplicated by simply cropping from the image made with the shortest focal-length lens.
There's an ongoing discussion about whether using back movements on a view camera changes perspective. I'm in the "yes" camp on this since moving the film about in relation to the objects in the scene changes their relative sizes, if not positions.
Doremus
Bob Salomon
15-May-2022, 11:01
“ There's an ongoing discussion about whether using back movements on a view camera changes perspective. I'm in the "yes" camp on this since moving the film about in relation to the objects in the scene changes their relative sizes, if not positions.”
Back movements change image shape. Front movements do not.
Heroique
15-May-2022, 11:09
There's an ongoing discussion about whether using back movements on a view camera changes perspective. I'm in the "yes" camp on this since moving the film about in relation to the objects in the scene changes their relative sizes, if not positions.
I think Doremus is correct about back movements, as long as one distinguishes between geometric perspective and viewpoint perspective.
Back swing changes geometric perspective, but not viewpoint perspective.
Back shift changes neither.
Doremus, if memory serves, I think you proposed those two terms many years ago in that old, eternally long, but incredibly entertaining thread about how to define perspective. Do you remember that fun but exasperating thread? Those are two terms LFers might put on their refrigerator door.
How about "photography can be down right miserable."
That's why it attracts us masochists.
Bernice Loui
15-May-2022, 11:58
Using a view camera for images like Portraits absolutely alters the sitter's perception and overall mood-emotions of the portrait being made. Having done both view camera portraits and roll film-digital portraits, each has their own plus-minus to meet a given portrait image goal.
Goes back to the "Decisive Moment" image -vs- highly crafted with conceived intent image. Yet, the roll film or digital camera is absolutely and fully capable of being used for those "highly crafted with conceived intent image"... think tethered display digital camera on a camera support. And yes, using a digital or roll film camera does not make image making any less serious.
View camera or mirrorless digital they are mere tools and means to achieve a given image goal.
Bernice
I wonder if using a LF camera makes it seem the photographer is giving special attention to their work? That they're serious about what they're doing. That helps the subjects be more serious as well in responding more expressively.
Bernice Loui
15-May-2022, 12:03
Except there are many that continue to believe the lowest weight field folder is the most desirable view camera... for them to discover the un-alterable limitations of their lowest weight field folder.. followed by a shoulder shrug..
~Demands on camera/lens/camera support and all is directly related to image maker experience, demands and needs, which is learned by being challenged with a variety of image making needs and goals.
Bernice
Monorail cameras are too heavy and wood folders are better for use in the field
Heroique
15-May-2022, 12:05
How about "photography can be down right miserable." Great experiences and memories, but times that were in no way, fun.
I think the most physically painful and emotionally stressful of any LF endeavor is macro work in the wilderness.
Among those who have tried it, this might actually be a popular opinion winning instant agreement.
But among those who haven’t, it might be an unpopular opinion, since they wouldn’t be able to imagine the misery they’d be getting themselves into!
Bernice Loui
15-May-2022, 12:10
Newer is always better belief, until real world experience teaches the most difficult lesson of how any given problem is solved can be done in more ways than one. These Foto folks lack the experience/understanding/experience of what advantages sheet film absolutely has over digital. They have learned and are secure with their digital centric skill set that other image making methods can be threatening to their ways and abilities..
~Brain-mind is wired to resist change and continue with what has proven to be workable, regardless of the truth or reality.
Bernice
Oh boy, does that ring true for me!
I remember working in the Steens Mt. area in Oregon once when a group of photography students from the University of Oregon came by with their Holgas and digicams (with their instructor too, I might add). They though I was out of earshot, but I could clearly hear the disparaging remarks from, "what a dinosaur," "who does he think he is anyway, Ansel Adams?" etc., etc. I'm still angry.
Doremus
Bernice Loui
15-May-2022, 12:22
Lens focal length and lens type is driven and determined by image to be made/goals.
FF digital/35mm film lens choices goes from 14mm to 500mm, with large apertures on some and sorta focus lenses.
6x9 view camera lens focal lengths from 38mm to 500mm.
5x7 view camera lens focal lengths from 72mm to 780mm, add sorta focus lenses to this mix.
Camera serves lens choice, lens choice is driven by images to be made.
Bernice
Interesting.
For me, it's the opposite -- where I set up the camera determines what focal length lens I will use.
Photography SHOULD be fun.
But at $20+ per frame for 5x7 and up, the sitter SHOULD sit still!
That's why it attracts us masochists.
Exactly -- it can be miserable, but we still enjoy it.
As a climber put it..."No one climbs Everest for fun."
Doremus Scudder
15-May-2022, 13:32
... Back swing changes geometric perspective, but not viewpoint perspective. Back shift changes neither.
Doremus, if memory serves, I think you proposed those two terms many years ago in that old, eternally long, but incredibly entertaining thread about how to define perspective. Do you remember that fun but exasperating thread? Those are two terms LFers might put on their refrigerator door.
[Cues up the old song from Gigi] Ah, yes, I remember it well! All about definitions even though there was basic agreement on everything else.
I think the most physically painful and emotionally stressful of any LF endeavor is macro work in the wilderness...
With a folding field camera with no rear-standard focus and no easy way to move your camera back-and-forth except picking up and repositioning the tripod on uneven terrain necessitating lengthening and shortening of leg lengths, with the wind moving everything around and, finally, once you get everything positioned perfectly finding out that there's no easy way to get to the front of the camera to set aperture/shutter speed so you have to dismount the lens carefully, set everything, and replace it carefully, hoping you haven't moved anything from it's original position...
Yep, been there, done that.
Doremus
Wheathins
15-May-2022, 13:49
I think Sillverfast and Vuescan are overrated and not worth the money. Stick with free Epsonscan.I don't think Epson scan outputs dng files
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
Bigger is better??? :0
Steve K
Compare this to the current Christie’s auction of AA and both Weston’s original prints. It ends on the 24th and expected selling ranges are a pittance compared to this.
Why the drastic disparity?
sorry to say it like this/ sound condescending /disparaging but(to many in the collectable art world) the AA and Weston prints are "just photographs"... they're nice photographs but it's not quite the same...
Ironage
17-May-2022, 04:14
This has been a helpful thread for me. Thanks.
Mine: Using a light meter is like using a tuning fork before playing every note of Devil’s Dream on the fiddle. (I am not there yet!)
maltfalc
17-May-2022, 07:32
This has been a helpful thread for me. Thanks.
Mine: Using a light meter is like using a tuning fork before playing every note of Devil’s Dream on the fiddle. (I am not there yet!)
that analogy makes no sense. a photo is equivalent to a song, not a note. if you're tuning your fiddle or adjusting your lights, it makes perfect sense to check the results before playing a song or taking a photo.
paulbarden
17-May-2022, 07:48
I have no "opinions" about large format photography that I feel need expressing to others. I enjoy what photography brings to my life, the things it enables me to do, and the sense of purpose it gives me. Any opinions I have about LF photography that may be "unpopular" with others are irrelevant.
Any opinions I have about LF photography that may be "unpopular" with others are irrelevant.
That's a very interesting opinion, and one that I generally share -- but generally don't share it with others.
Michael R
17-May-2022, 09:20
"lol"
martiansea
17-May-2022, 10:46
Last I heard, painters didn't use lenses...
David Hockney would disagree! :p
David Hockney would disagree! :p
And perhaps Holly Roberts...:cool:
John Layton
17-May-2022, 12:28
yes...some painters (and draw-ers) used lenses in their early "pre-photographic" era camera obscuras to help them in their craft. (also camera lucidas, which were a bit different). Many of the obscuras were later pressed into service as (photographic) cameras, once that guy Herschel figured out how to fix an image for greater permanence. (lots of controversy about this, also with due respect to Josiah Wedgwood - but I'll leave this alone for now!).
But what is completely over the top is that the Vikings gained enough skill in lathe-turning and polishing glass so that some of their "lenses" (likely used to start fires) could actually rival mid-20th century optics! Then there was that guy Ibn al Hatham (9th century I think?) ...convicted and jailed as a heretic because he could not reverse the course of the Nile (as he had earlier promised) to satisfy early political/engineering desires - and then spent his time while in confinement basically writing a treatise on the human optical system! Oh...and then there was Nero - who made use of naturally occurring crystals as corrective eyeware! All kinds of amazing early talents conspiring to ultimately cause all of us wild and crazy photo-geeks and nerds to end up on this forum! Imagine! :rolleyes:
linhofbiker
17-May-2022, 13:19
Exposure is not complicated - just follow the "sunny 16" rule or "sunny 22" at the beach. Kodak can't be wrong since they put it in/on the box (for little films)
All kinds of amazing early talents conspiring to ultimately cause all of us wild and crazy photo-geeks and nerds to end up on this forum! Imagine! :rolleyes:
And, as you point out, let's not forget about all the anti-science ignoramuses who got in the way! Imagine where we might be today if the "Dark Ages" never happened. Who knows, digital cameras might be an artifact of the distant past, and as obscure as the camera obscura.
rdenney
18-May-2022, 04:48
Monorail cameras are too heavy and wood folders are better for use in the field
That was going to be my entry.
Rick “out…standing in the field” Denney
pdmoylan
18-May-2022, 08:52
That was going to be my entry.
Rick “out…standing in the field” Denney
…as long as the field cameras have all movements but particularly rear rise, fall and shift. Makes compositions that much easier.
Have always preferred the precision and rigity of a monorail in the field, but sure lighter and compact is preferred.
Not all monorails are heavy. My 4x5 monorail is 1.75 pounds (800 grams).
For some tastes it not as rigid enough, no indents...so not very precise for some (but very accurate -- what is on the GG goes onto the film), the only rear movement are swing and tilt, and a few other minor details which definitely keep it out of the class of the more expensive and heavier machines.
Eureka Valley Dunes taken with the camera and my (boring, and only) 150mm lens -- my friend in the distance is also using the same camera, but he used more exciting lenses.
And a skull in the snow in the upper Mono Lake Basin, taken with the same boring lens on the same trip as we were heading home.
I'm sure most of us field cam folks wouldn't turn down a sub-2lb monorail (Gowland?). But I think the vast majority of commonly-available monorails, especially in the lower price brackets, are much heavier and bulkier than a cheap Intrepid, Crown Graphic, or any of the many field folders.
At least that's what I see from new 4x5 shooters, toting a $100 Calumet and cursing the weight/size. And God-forbid they've dragged it out in the storage box!
Doremus Scudder
18-May-2022, 11:45
…as long as the field cameras have all movements but particularly rear rise, fall and shift. Makes compositions that much easier. ...
I'd love to know more about these field cameras with rear rise and fall... I don't know of any myself.
I do, however, understand the desire for lots of movements on folding field cameras. I won't buy one without shift on at least one standard, front rise/fall plus swings and tilts and back swings and tilts.
Those capabilities plus the point-and swing/tilt methods to get more effective rise/fall/shift allow me to work in just about any situation with 3-pound cameras.
Doremus
pdmoylan
18-May-2022, 12:40
Based upon specs, certain Ebony and Shen Hao 4x5 cameras have the referenced rear movements and in some instances rear swing as well (probably the least used movement in any LF camera owing to the associated distortion created (front swing being much more useful), but I have not tried either. Rear tilts are important when one points the camera down or up and you want to keep the film plane perpendicular to the ground).
The great thing about rear rise and fall is that for landscapes in particular, you can so easily move the horizon line which IME is critical for realizing best composition. It also reduces need to point the camera down or up and modify the rear tilt, a 2 step process vs 1 step rise/fall. Rather moving the camera and tripod to the left or right to obtain refined vertical borders, rear shift allows easy corrections. Just my experience.,
Bob Salomon
18-May-2022, 12:45
Based upon specs, certain Ebony and Shen Hao 4x5 cameras have the referenced rear movements and in some instances rear swing as well (probably the least used movement in any LF camera owing to the associated distortion created (front swing being much more useful), but I have not tried either. Rear tilts are important when one points the camera down or up and you want to keep the film plane perpendicular to the ground).
The great thing about rear rise and fall is that for landscapes in particular, you can so easily move the horizon line which IME is critical for realizing best composition. It also reduces need to point the camera down or up and modify the rear tilt, a 2 step process vs 1 step rise/fall. Rather moving the camera and tripod to the left or right to obtain refined vertical borders, rear shift allows easy corrections. Just my experience.,
Rear swing does not create distortion. But just like rear tilt it controls subject shape.
pdmoylan
18-May-2022, 13:07
Right Bob, rear swing changes object shapes whereas front swing does not.
Doremus Scudder
18-May-2022, 13:45
Based upon specs, certain Ebony and Shen Hao 4x5 cameras have the referenced rear movements and in some instances rear swing as well (probably the least used movement in any LF camera owing to the associated distortion created (front swing being much more useful), but I have not tried either. Rear tilts are important when one points the camera down or up and you want to keep the film plane perpendicular to the ground).
The great thing about rear rise and fall is that for landscapes in particular, you can so easily move the horizon line which IME is critical for realizing best composition. It also reduces need to point the camera down or up and modify the rear tilt, a 2 step process vs 1 step rise/fall. Rather moving the camera and tripod to the left or right to obtain refined vertical borders, rear shift allows easy corrections. Just my experience.,
I manage to move the horizon line around in my images just fine with front rise/fall. Really, it's the same thing for the most part as rear rise/fall would be unless you're working really close and parallax becomes an issue. I agree, though, rise/fall on at least the front is really necessary.
As for rear swing: I use it all the time when working with buildings (cityscapes or architectural work). It's useful for refining the way horizontal lines are rendered. I can tweak them back parallel with just a bit of swing, or do the opposite and accentuate the convergence; it's all in the position of the back relative to that façade.
FWIW, all my cameras have rear swing and tilt; just no rise/fall. Even my lightweight monorails don't have rear rise/fall (Alpina and GVII).
Doremus
Heroique
18-May-2022, 13:52
One might also keep in mind that turning a 4x5 camera on its side on a sturdy tripod and head can provide movements you didn’t think your camera had.
For example, turn my 4x5 Tachi on its side, and presto:
• Front rise/fall converts to front shift
• Front swing converts to front axial tilt
• Back swing converts to back axial tilt
My Tachi’s manual doesn’t acknowledge these movements, but I do! :cool:
Michael R
18-May-2022, 14:02
You do what you have to do. One of John Sexton’s most well known pictures was made with the view camera upside down.
One might also keep in mind that turning a 4x5 camera on its side on a sturdy tripod and head can provide movements you didn’t think your camera had.
For example, turn my 4x5 Tachi on its side, and presto:
• Front rise/fall converts to front shift
• Front swing converts to front axial tilt
• Back swing converts to back axial tilt
My Tachi’s manual doesn’t acknowledge these movements, but I do! :cool:
pdmoylan
18-May-2022, 14:27
I manage to move the horizon line around in my images just fine with front rise/fall. Really, it's the same thing for the most part as rear rise/fall would be unless you're working really close and parallax becomes an issue. I agree, though, rise/fall on at least the front is really necessary.
As for rear swing: I use it all the time when working with buildings (cityscapes or architectural work). It's useful for refining the way horizontal lines are rendered. I can tweak them back parallel with just a bit of swing, or do the opposite and accentuate the convergence; it's all in the position of the back relative to that façade.
FWIW, all my cameras have rear swing and tilt; just no rise/fall. Even my lightweight monorails don't have rear rise/fall (Alpina and GVII).
Doremus
Agreed in the front standard rise and fall. For me, once I set my front tilt and or swing, particularly with longer lenses, I default to rear rise/fall to avoid the arm stretch but also to avoid having to readjust front tilt/swing.
Your experience with back swing would be quite instructional if you you provide an example?
pdmoylan
18-May-2022, 14:28
One might also keep in mind that turning a 4x5 camera on its side on a sturdy tripod and head can provide movements you didn’t think your camera had.
For example, turn my 4x5 Tachi on its side, and presto:
• Front rise/fall converts to front shift
• Front swing converts to front axial tilt
• Back swing converts to back axial tilt
My Tachi’s manual doesn’t acknowledge these movements, but I do! :cool:
Ingenious but I dare say a bit awkward.
Bob Salomon
18-May-2022, 14:41
One might also keep in mind that turning a 4x5 camera on its side on a sturdy tripod and head can provide movements you didn’t think your camera had.
For example, turn my 4x5 Tachi on its side, and presto:
• Front rise/fall converts to front shift
• Front swing converts to front axial tilt
• Back swing converts to back axial tilt
My Tachi’s manual doesn’t acknowledge these movements, but I do! :cool:
And that makes the camera yaw free when used on it’s side as then the swing is beneath the tilt.
Mark Sawyer
18-May-2022, 15:30
Right Bob, rear swing changes object shapes whereas front swing does not.
True, but front swing takes the lens off-axis, requiring more lens coverage and swinging the plane of focus off the focal plane.
Get a little, lose a little...
Bob Salomon
18-May-2022, 15:42
True, but front swing takes the lens off-axis, requiring more lens coverage and swinging the plane of focus off the focal plane.
Get a little, lose a little...
Unless your camera has axis tilts and swings.
True, but front swing takes the lens off-axis, requiring more lens coverage and swinging the plane of focus off the focal plane.
Get a little, lose a little...
Dude,
that's why you use a lens that covers like a 20x24 image ( on your 4x5 ) or you fix everything in photo shop !
Mark Sawyer
18-May-2022, 16:47
Unless your camera has axis tilts and swings.
I was referring to the optical axis of the lens, not on/off axis tilts of the standards. If you tilt the lens, you tilt the axis.
My opinion...it's all on the GG and don't much care if things change shape in the landscape.
pdmoylan
18-May-2022, 17:16
But do you consciously use back swing in the field to change shapes of objects or is it a side effect of trying to maximize DOD and/or align it as you want. Why would you not wish to go for wyswyg vs modifying shapes unless for effect? Just curious.
Serge S
18-May-2022, 17:32
Yes - not familiar with these
I'd love to know more about these field cameras with rear rise and fall... I don't know of any myself
Doremus
But do you consciously use back swing in the field to change shapes of objects or is it a side effect of trying to maximize DOD and/or align it as you want. Why would you not wish to go for wyswyg vs modifying shapes unless for effect? Just curious.
The exact shape of objects ('reality') is relatively unimportant in most cases in the natural landscape. I'll use back tilt to get leaning trees to line up nice and straight, or to get straight trees to lean inwards when it helps to move the viewers' eyes around my composition. Back swing could come in useful to create a different visual swoop down the length of a log. I always photograph for effect. I am not a documentarian.
WYSIWYG is exactly what I get -- that's what is great about the ground glass.
linhofbiker
19-May-2022, 05:25
Schneideritus is a bug not a feature.
I'd love to know more about these field cameras with rear rise and fall... I don't know of any myself.
Doremus
Me either. I just use front rise & fall.
The exact shape of objects ('reality') is relatively unimportant in most cases in the natural landscape. I'll use back tilt to get leaning trees to line up nice and straight, or to get straight trees to lean inwards when it helps to move the viewers' eyes around my composition. Back swing could come in useful to create a different visual swoop down the length of a log. I always photograph for effect. I am not a documentarian.
WYSIWYG is exactly what I get -- that's what is great about the ground glass.
I'll have to try some rear tilting (and swinging) the next time I use my 37mm Mamiya Fisheye. Never tried it with the fisheye -- which always has bent trees!
The more one learns about and practices craft, the easier the art flows.
pdmoylan
19-May-2022, 09:29
The more one learns about and practices craft, the easier the art flows.
… and to know when to walk away rather than capture an image that doesn’t inspire or work for you.
I still believe in visualizing an outcome before setting up. It’s easier for me perhaps since I am looking for color relationships and frame accordingly. B&W requires a much more demanding and refined management of the entire taking/development/print process to produce what is in the mind’s eye (to use a Yeat’s euphemism). Working within the zone system I think benefits outcomes.
For me, it’s the placement and expression of whites in a B&W image which makes or breaks it.
My opinion: In an infinite universe (for all practical purposes, considering one's lifespan), any limitations one puts on one's work (in my case, no cropping/burning/dodging) places no limitations on the number of possible images available for one to make.
I may not be able to make your* images, but why would I want to? :cool:
* -- a general 'your', not anyone in particular
Doremus Scudder
19-May-2022, 09:59
... Your experience with back swing would be quite instructional if you you provide an example?
Sure. Let's say I'm photographing in the city, working rather close (think 90mm lens on 4x5), I've got a nice storefront that I'm photographing at an oblique angle. I really like the angles made by the converging horizontals and I want more; more converging in the distance and more in the field of view close-up.
So, I'll swing the camera back, in the direction of closer to perpendicular to the wall, till I get the horizontal lines to go where I want them. I can manage the image (within limits) to make the lines exit the image where I like; at a corner, whatever. Of course, in order to keep the plane of sharp focus on the façade, I need to compensate for the back swing by swinging the lens in the opposite direction (and shifting or panning a bit as needed). Yes, I could reposition the entire camera and then swing just the lens, but once set up at the point I want, swinging back and lens is much easier.
Or, the opposite case. Let's say I have little choice where to set up the camera and I'm off center on my subject a bit. Often, I'll just point the camera at where I want the center of the image to be and swing the back parallel to the façade to get the horizontal lines parallel. Then, I'll adjust plane of sharp focus with lens swing. This, in essence, is just applying shift, but is often faster for me in the field. Similarly, even when I set up parallel to the façade and use shift to frame the image, I often need to tweak the back position just a bit to get the horizontals parallel, which I do instead of panning parallel and then shifting to frame just because its often easier.
I work a lot with city images in which the optical center (lens axis) is not in the center of the image.
Here are a couple of examples of both cases: In the second image, I ran out of available shift, so swung both back and lens to get more.
pdmoylan
19-May-2022, 10:06
Thank you DoremusS.! Helpful
pdmoylan
19-May-2022, 10:14
My opinion: In an infinite universe (for all practical purposes, considering one's lifespan), any limitations one puts on one's work (in my case, no cropping/burning/dodging) places no limitations on the number of possible images available for one to make.
I may not be able to make your* images, but why would I want to? :cool:
* -- a general 'your', not anyone in particular
Can I say it differently? No matter what limitations you impose or are imposed upon you (limited lens choice etc), there are still an infinite number of images one can make. So refining one’s style does not close any doors.
I can attest to this from a shoot 2 days ago with an on going project since 3?years. Same location, one lens, one camera, same aperture, but optimizing results due to ideal sky conditions. I took over 400 images (digital of course) and not one was identical, and only 2 were truly standouts. But the 2 really superseded my objective. Over the top good.
Can I say it differently? ...
Sounds very good to me.
I have been photographing along the same stretch of creek with LF since 1979. Oh, I manage to get myself elsewhere, too. I found that photographing in places like Death Valley, or Yosemite Valley for that matter, gives me experience with light that I can bring back to, and benefit from while under the redwoods.
Camera movements:
The truth be it, in the forest I tend to use movements at a minimal level. It is too chaotic to have nice planes to work with. Its opposite, the 'grand landscape', gets away with minimum movements for a different reason...just don't need much. In between, especially all that city stuff, usually has all sorts of planes around to twist the bellows for!
1) Ossagon Creek -- 5x7 Eastman View No.2, front has only rise/fall, the back has swing and tilt only. It has take me a little while to adapt, but such a beauty is worth it...what movements it has are geared.
2) Two Redwoods -- 11x14 Eastman w/ limited movements. I have a Chamonix now, but this image did not need the extra movements I have now.
Heroique
19-May-2022, 12:46
2) Two Redwoods -- 11x14 Eastman w/ limited movements. I have a Chamonix now, but this image did not need the extra movements I have now.
I like how the two redwoods frame the three background kings.
Did you use only front rise and nothing else?
Heroique
19-May-2022, 13:34
Ansel Adams’ best group portraits are, well, certainly memorable if not spine tingling.
My choice of word “memorable” might not be popular.
Many were client assignments, but following orders didn’t always rob him of his talents or luck.
227394
Here’s one I’ve always liked – college kids in 1967 rehearsing the Greek tragedy Oedipus Rex, or, “My wife is my mother?” [translation mine]. The central woman has just been taken down from a noose and is taking her last breath. I think the standing person is their teacher-director. They lucked out with the fog! Ancient tragedy in the mist, memorable if not a masterpiece to me.
pdmoylan
19-May-2022, 14:05
Nostalgic and speaks of a tempered time, a monoculture of sorts then changed by Vietnam.
Not really taken with the image otherwise. Probably would have preferred a grainy Leica image to the Hasselblad (assumption).
Sal Santamaura
19-May-2022, 16:39
...Probably would have preferred a grainy...image...
Perfect segue to another unpopular opinion of mine, this one not specific to large format. I hate grain and have always considered it "noise" in the system, i.e. a defect to be avoided. Typically accomplished by using larger film and contact printing :)
pdmoylan
19-May-2022, 17:09
When I think of “proper” examples of grain, Salgado comes immediately to mind and why would he wish to introduce it into prints from Canon and Pentax MF digital cameras but to create texture and tri-x simulation. But his is not LF but perhaps the most poignant examples historically of man’s plight in a harsh world. The grain in his images never gets in the way of the potency of his work imo.
I hate grain and have always considered it "noise" in the system, i.e. a defect to be avoided. Typically accomplished by using larger film and contact printing :)
I like grain -- and I don't just mean in my sandwich bread. However, when I want a grainy photo I usually reach for Kodak 2475 in my Minolta MG-s 16mm sub-mini.
I like how the two redwoods frame the three background kings.
Did you use only front rise and nothing else?
No movements that I remember. The camera was pointed fairly level, but might have used back tilt to keep the redwoods pointed in the right direction. The camera had no indents so I would have 'zeroed them out' by what was on the GG. It was Sept, 2001 and I had three 4 year olds boys sitting on a blanket having lunch next to me while I quickly set-up and exposed three sheets. The 11x14 was fairly new to me and wanted back-up negs for any needed development changes (time/temp/method). I managed to get the job done before my boys got up and started to run between the legs of the tripod.
FP4...f64 @ 30 seconds. I print (carbon) the neg I developed in a staining developer.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.