Seeing in 4x5

[davidp]

Hey,

Today I met up with a famous Australian large format landscape artist called Geoff Woods (www.geoffwoods.com.au) and he gave me some really valuable tips on 4x5 and stuff. But one thing he wanted to make really clear was to start seeing in 4x5 world. Since i am only learning he said that at the moment I am only seeing in 6x6 world, square framing and normal depth of field blah blah, but I needed to start seeing the world in 4x5... He didn't describe it too clearly.... but he mentioned stuff like the whole attention to detail, he even said that the 4x5 will pick up detail our eyes wont at the scene, stuff like that. Also stuff with the focus and all and all of that. Even though i'm aware of the detail and the focus (to a degree, im still learning!) He said I need to throw out any other format world and just see in 4x5 world if I want to take 4x5 seriously. Has anybody else heard anything like this? I dunno If I explained it very well.... but could anybody expand upon this view?

I understand how I gotta view everything from a 4x5 perspective, rather than just 35mm and 6x6 when shooting large format, and I think i'm deffiantly beginning to (i've studied nothing but large format for months!) but on the other hand I could be wrong. Just remember this was his own personal view on large format photography

Anyways, if anybody has their own thoughts I'd like to hear them!!

Thanks.

[willwilson]

I'm not sure I totally agree with that concept philosophically, but that said, if it works for you by all means. I tend to think of camera in more of the paint brush type of way. The brushrs are my tools, big brushes for covering large areas of canvas and small brushes for the details. The brushes don't make paintings. Painters make paintings.

I do think it is important to learn to see within the constraints of your format and equipment at hand. Knowing your tools frees your mind and allows you to be more successful. It allows you to make decisions quickly about a potential subject and spend a lot less time trying to "force" an image that your tools just won't deliver.

[Michael Graves]

One of the first things you start to learn as you make the move from miniature formats to large format is that the "normal" LF lens is the equivalent to a telephoto lens in medium or large format. By that, I don't mean a telephoto design, which is a whole different discussion...it's simply a longer focal length.

As such, the "normal" lens for a Hasselblad, which is 80mm, will give roughly the same angle of view as a "normal" (165mm) lens for a 4x5. However, the two lenses, positioned at precisely the same location, pointed at precisely the same subject, will deliver noticeably different depth of field. The longer lens offers significantly less DOF than the short lens. You seem the same thing when you go from normal to wide angle with any focal length.

Eventually, you learn to predict how much DOF any given lens will give. But note one thing. The DOF of a 210mm lens at any give instant is the same, whether it be on 4x5 or on 35mm. The 35mm camera is simply recording a smaller area of the same image.

[Ken Lee]

I would take what Geoff said with "a grain of salt", as they say. Take the suggestion, and then put it in the back of your mind. The most important thing is to see, not just in the 4x5 world.

If you are looking for Beauty, just look and you will find Beauty everywhere. The more that happens, the more you will feel at home with whatever equipment you have.

[Nathan Potter]

I think Woods' statement as relayed by you is a bit of a generalization so it's difficult to be specific in trying to clarify what was on his mind. He seems to be a landscape photographer so I would guess that he is referring to all the elements that may be important to a landscape photographer. A framing of the image in the 4X5 format that enhances the scene as you perceive it. As Michael mentions above the 4X5 lenses work with shallower depth of field and especially 4X5 long focal length lenses, so standard movements are particularly important. Landscapes imply detail and textural nuances in the image so critical focusing may be warranted.

But a first step is to determine what kind of 4X5 photography you want to do. That will have a huge bearing on what you see and compose on the Ground Glass (GG). That will also drive your equipment set.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[ljsegil]

I think there is truth in the notion that one produces qualitatively different images in different formats, 35mm to the variety of MF options to all the possible sizes of LF. I don't think I can enumerate the differences, but they certainly go beyond simple differences in aspect ratio and encompass at least such things as DOF, range of detail seen and tonality within a format, subtleties of gradations of color, and many more.
However, I would add another aspect of changing format which I have found most challenging and that is learning to see in black & white (or shades of grey) a world that I perceive in color. I am struggling with this different way of seeing and finding it the most difficult format adjustment to make (for me).
If all this were easy, it would not be as much fun.
LJS

[Ed Richards]

I have been trying to go the other way, shooting FF 35mm digital (D700) after only shooting 4x5 for the last 4 years. (I am not giving up the 4x5, but there is too much you cannot use LF for.) While I shot a lot of 35mm years ago, I find I am having to relearn how to see with the smaller format, in particular, how to see the pictures I quit seeing when using 4x5.

[Walter Calahan]

Formats are only tools. If a particular format doesn't work with the way you see, don't use it.

[Daniel_Buck]

Yes, large films pick up on alot of detail that I don't see when I'm shooting! I usually try to "focus" (pun!) on the main shapes for my composition, and less on the little details.

[Bruce Watson]

Today I met up with a famous Australian large format landscape artist called Geoff Woods (www.geoffwoods.com.au) and he gave me some really valuable tips on 4x5 and stuff. But one thing he wanted to make really clear was to start seeing in 4x5 world. Since i am only learning he said that at the moment I am only seeing in 6x6 world, square framing and normal depth of field blah blah, but I needed to start seeing the world in 4x5... He didn't describe it too clearly.... but he mentioned stuff like the whole attention to detail, he even said that the 4x5 will pick up detail our eyes wont at the scene, stuff like that. Also stuff with the focus and all and all of that. Even though i'm aware of the detail and the focus (to a degree, im still learning!) He said I need to throw out any other format world and just see in 4x5 world if I want to take 4x5 seriously. Has anybody else heard anything like this?

My interpretation of your interpretation is that he's telling you to learn the craft. He's encouraging you to learn it by immersion; do 5x4 and nothing else. Once you know it well enough that it becomes largely automatic (that is, once you learn to "see in the 5x4 world") you will be in a better position to use it to make your art. At least that's what it sounds like to me.

If my interpretation is correct, this is more or less the same thing that many photography, painting, sculpture, etc. teachers teach. Learn the craft -- the tools and techniques, their capabilities and limitations, how and when to use them, etc. Then apply the craft to make the art. This is an approach that works well for a lot of people. But it's just one approach; there are others that are just as valid and work for other people. Clearly, YMMV.

[Steve M Hostetter]

Use a view card,,, I didn't use one for the longest time and then started using one and it helps me to shoot any format I choose...

[kev curry]

I often see compositions that I would otherwise miss without a viewing card.

kev

[Gordon Moat]

I mostly agree with Bruce on this, in the idea that you need to immerse yourself in shooting with a 4x5. Another approach to this is the way I relate 4x5 to my formal art background. I find 4x5 closer to drawing a scene than I do with using smaller format cameras. In a way that relates to what you were told, because when you draw you decide on the details by emphasizing some details over others, and you also control the composition by decide the relative placement of all elements in a scene in relation to each other.

A little helped tool that I use is a small viewfinder off an old camera. While the 4x5 is in my bag, I view a scene through the viewfinder, and get a rough idea of the composition I want to produce. Then I set-up the camera and use the ground glass to compose the scene before me.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

[Bill_1856]

I think that he's right.
There is a great deal of difference between looking at a dim 4x5 ground glass with both eyes (under a dark cloth), and visualizing a smaller (35mm or 6x6) brilliant and magnified image with one eye, at an apparent distance of (usually) 3 feet.

[Andrew O'Neill]

If you are going to do work in 4x5 of course you should "see" in 4x5. Seeing for me also means framing/composition. Make a 4x5 inch cutout in white card, go out and suss out some images. You'll quickly see what that photographer meant. Maybe he just didn't explain himself clearly. The more you shoot in 4x5 the more intuitive the seeing/framing becomes. If you've been using 6x6 a lot, then you can probably visualize images in this format easily.

[John Kasaian]

I don't know that I "see" 8x10, but I've used my camera for such a long time now I have a strong preference to shoot in 8x10---it just feels more natural to me. Perhaps reaching that level of comfort is what is meant by "seeing" 4x5?

[Steve M Hostetter]

Yeah John,, I agree I thought 4x5 and 8x10 was the same ratio

[Maris Rusis]

There is of course the photographic "schlepp factor". If I remember right the mantra goes: "As ye schlepp so shall ye see."

If I carry a Rolleiflex suddenly the world is full of promising square pictures. If the 8x10 is over the shoulder then there are rivers of texture that would fit perfectly on a gelatin-silver contact. My old Pentax MX seems to demand hand-held candids.

Go out with only a 4x5 camera that you know how to use and 4x5 style photographs will find you.

[Shen45]

I often see compositions that I would otherwise miss without a viewing card.

kev

Another very definite yes for a viewing card -- with string and knots at the focal length of my lenses.

[poco]

I'm always suspicious of the kind of prescriptive statement this guy seems to be making -- whatever the hell it means, ignore it. Just starting out, you're at an advantage in that your use of the format hasn't ossified into sterile predictability, so make the most of it. Try different things and experiment. Eventually "seeing in 4x5" will have a certain meaning for you, but it'll be your meaning and not some other guy's.