PDA

View Full Version : Should I give up LF and go miniature?



Michael Graves
7-Oct-2006, 19:39
Having shot nothing but 5x7 or 8x10 for the past few years, I had forgotten how light a 4x5 Speed Graphic was. I spent the day wandering around the Green Mountains of Vermont today shooting with that baby. The camera, tripod and a small back with film holders, light meter and dark cloth was lighter that my 8x10 by itself. It was amazing!!

I'll process the negatives tomorrow and see if I got anything worth while. But I did have one interesting experience. My wife was driving and we went past this amazing barn with all kinds of attached silos and hay lofts and other cool addendums and the sun was just sinking down toward the horizon, so the light was great. I screamed for her to stop and she did. This old guy, about sixty-five or seventy years old was just coming out of the barn. So I jumped out and asked him if it was all right if I took a picture of his barn.

"Well, shoot," he said. "Whatever would you want a picture of THAT for?"
"I like it."
"So go right ahead."

He watched me while I set up the old Speed Graphic and composed the shot. I was working pretty fast because I figured I only had the light for a few minutes. When I was done, he said, "Hell, boy. That camera of your is older than I am."

"Could be," I said. "I was made back in the late fifties or early sixties. What are you? About forty five? Fifty?"

"Yeah, right." Then he chuckled. "I got me one of them digital cameras. It take right nice pictures and you can see what you got right away!"

You know, until he said that, I had been intending to offer him a print of the photo if it came out well. Now he can stick it in his ear.

Or not. I guess it ain't HIS fault.

Capocheny
7-Oct-2006, 22:05
Michael,

Offer him a print and he'll realize the error of his ways! :)

Remember, "a person knows only what he knows unless he's shown something different."

Cheers

David A. Goldfarb
8-Oct-2006, 06:59
I found I couldn't appreciate the attractions of 4x5" until I had used 8x10" for a few years. No reason not to shoot both!

BrianShaw
8-Oct-2006, 07:03
I'm sure glad that I didn't need to buy a Rolls Royce to learn to appreciate my Mercedes!

Michael Graves
8-Oct-2006, 07:52
I'm sure glad that I didn't need to buy a Rolls Royce to learn to appreciate my Mercedes!

Hmmmm. Wonder what I can do to more fully appreciate my wife?

Michael Graves
8-Oct-2006, 08:27
Here's the first negative that I scanned from the old Speed.

http://www.mwgraves.com/portfolios/michael/richmond_interiors.jpg

reellis67
8-Oct-2006, 08:48
I like my 4x5, but I'm getting to like the 8x10 as well. There is something of an appeal, for me anyway, about being able to setup quickly and work with a light kit, but I found that as I progressed through the sizes that I found a temporary interest in previous cameras, but after a while I went back to where I was. I shoot with 120 a lot because my wife just won't tolerate the setup time for the 4x5, and I find that I like the speed at times, but I would *never* get rid of any of my cameras because there are time when any given camera fits the bill better than the others. There are times when the speed of a smaller format works well, and there are times when it doesn't. I think I would be more frustrated having only one format to work with - like David said in his post, why not just use both? I like having the choice to use 8x10, 4x5, or even 120.

- Randy

David A. Goldfarb
8-Oct-2006, 09:07
I don't necessarily think that the Rolls Royce analogy is quite it. For me, 8x10" was just more intuitive at first. The ground glass was about the size of a sheet of paper, and I could see the effects of the movements easily. Working on a groundglass the same as the size of a final print seemed to require less abstraction in terms of knowing how the print would look when enlarged.

4x5" seemed fiddlier at first. But then I could take what I learned from 8x10" and apply it to 4x5", and it all became more natural, particularly in situations where 8x10" was just less practical.

Jay DeFehr
8-Oct-2006, 10:20
We all see the world differently, and as a consequence, approach it differently in our work. For instance, I would have been far more interested in the old man himself, and relegated his odd barn to a background element. I might have even asked him to produce his digital camera as a part of the composition. I think the single greatest pitfall of LF photography is to take it too seriously, and sacrifice our sense of fun and playfulness. When it starts to feel like work, I know I'm doing something wrong. Good luck, and have fun!

Jay

Marko
8-Oct-2006, 11:46
Michael,

Offer him a print and he'll realize the error of his ways! :)

Remember, "a person knows only what he knows unless he's shown something different."

Cheers

Hey guys,

Go easy on the old fellow - he's using what was recomended to him by all the "experts" he knows and the thing probably really fits his needs.

After all, how many of you are using ready-to-go templates for your web pages and are happy with results?

:D

Brian Ellis
8-Oct-2006, 12:01
I think photography becomes more and more limiting and limited as the size of the cameras goes up. And I don't say that because of the size and weight of the equipment though that's probably one factor. But we all tend, often subconsciously I believe, to seek out those images that will best reveal our camera's abilities. For LF that tends to mean things with a lot of texture and detail, things that will work well when photographed at eye level, things that look best when sharp from front to back, etc. So at some point, and I'm sure it varies from one person to another, we start looking not for the best possible images but for the images that will best suit our cameras. Instead of saying to ourselves "that looks like a great potential photograph" we say "that looks like a great potential 11x14 [or whatever] photograph."

This isn't a novel thought with me. I attended a Tillman Crane workshop a few years ago, the general subject of which was "making non-large format photographs with a large format cameras." I.e. we were encouraged to use wide open apertures so that everything wasn't sharp from front to back, to photograph subjects that aren't the typical LF subjects, to get down on our knees or up on a ladder, etc. etc.

That's a round-about way of saying that maybe you've just found that 4x5 is the point beyond which you don't make better photographs but rather make better large format photographs.

Capocheny
8-Oct-2006, 15:26
Hey guys,

Go easy on the old fellow - he's using what was recomended to him by all the "experts" he knows and the thing probably really fits his needs.

After all, how many of you are using ready-to-go templates for your web pages and are happy with results?

:D

Hi Marko,

Your point was my point as well. I wasn't meaning to be hard on the old fellow. :)

So, until someone shows him something different, he'll most likely think digital is the be all, end all. :)

That's why I suggest that Michael send him a print (to show him the "error" of his way. Yes, yes... this was said as a "tongue in cheek comment." :))

Cheers

Bill_1856
8-Oct-2006, 15:37
Another "old barn picture." Just what the world needs.

Sal Santamaura
8-Oct-2006, 18:11
Another "old barn picture." Just what the world needs.Doc, in my opinion none of the pictures made by posters here and on similar Internet forums are "needed" by the world. Those who get paid to photograph make pictures the client is willing to pay for. Those who are amateurs make pictures they think they'll like (and maybe hope others will like).

What the world "needs" is a discovery that would obviate the need for the medical specialty you practiced. And other stuff like that discovery. All the rest is just something to pass time made available by no longer having to hunt/gather/till every waking hour just to survive. IMHO.

Sal Santamaura
9-Oct-2006, 10:30
...What the world "needs" is a discovery that would obviate the need for the medical specialty you practiced...In order to make things clear for this archive, note that I wrote those words assuming Bill was a retired oncologist. My inference was based on something he posted in another thread early this year. Subsequent PM inquiry revealed I was wrong. Apologies to Bill and may everyone else understand I was trying to say "what the world 'needs' is a cure for cancer."

65Galaxie
10-Oct-2006, 16:31
I was offended by Bill's remarks about another barn picture.

I persoanlly love old barns. I grew up on a farm that had a wonderful hayloft we would spend hrs playing in. This was on a piece of property that Federeck Remington (did I spell that right?) lived on for a yr as a sheep rancher in the 1870's before he became famous for western paintings and scultures. The house was actually in National Geographic in the mid 80's.

cyrus
10-Oct-2006, 20:45
But the real magic of using a Graphic is using it hand-held.
Get rid of the tripod, use the Force!

Marko
11-Oct-2006, 09:31
Hi Marko,

Your point was my point as well. I wasn't meaning to be hard on the old fellow. :)

So, until someone shows him something different, he'll most likely think digital is the be all, end all. :)

That's why I suggest that Michael send him a print (to show him the "error" of his way. Yes, yes... this was said as a "tongue in cheek comment." :))

Cheers

Actually, my point was that even after he's shown some seriously different, he might still like his digital better because it might still be better solution for him.

Just like so many serious photographers prefer to use ready-made web templates even after they are shown some serious web design examples.

IMHO, there are two reasons for this:

1. He/They is/are not professional(s) and hence not in need of anything more complex than the most simple ready-to go "solution".

2. He/They is/are not professional(s) and therefore may not be capable of really noticing the difference.

;)

Tongue in cheeck or not, that's actually fine as long as his/their chosen method fullfils his/their needs.

Michael Graves
11-Oct-2006, 15:06
You're absolutely right, Marko. I have a Canon Rebel XT that I used to make the photos that went into my last two books. I'm not about to shoot that many sheets of large format film and then spend all that time in the darkroom, knowing that Thomson's graphics reproduction is mediocre at best. This is a time and a place for digital.

Just like there's a time and a place for pictures of old barns.

65Galaxie
11-Oct-2006, 16:10
One thing I forgot to mention on the old barn issue. Here in Kansas about 10-14 yrs ago a strong straight wind came and knocked down aporx. 25% of the old barns in some areas that will never get rebuilt. Also these barns aren't getting maintained as the cost is too high. Many a famous old barns around here is getting neglected. Now is the time to document them in large format.