Really, really Large Format Camera

[Juergen Sattler]

Take a look at this guy's camera - it makes even the ULF cameras some of us use look very small.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0ta32g9M6c

Juergen

[jb7]

if ever anyone needed a DSLR and some uprezzing software...

seriously though, thanks for putting that up-

here's another- good pictures, in as much as can be told from the video-
good to see he still uses a tripod-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pL2SZW4gWPY

[robert fallis]

now that is large format, he seams a really inventive guy and I like his attitude to it all

bob

[Daniel_Buck]

looks like fun! I have heard of other 'truck cameras' before, but haven't ever seen a video detailing one! :-D

[Hollis]

Pretty cool indeed. Anyone have any idea what his chemistry/emulsion was or what that lens was?

[David A. Goldfarb]

He's doing in-camera Ilfochromes.

[Nathan Potter]

David I missed the Ilfochrome bit but I can't imagine using Ilfochrome chemistry while rolling a 12 to 15 inch diameter drum on the floor. (See the video). And the cost!

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[BarryS]

I also figured it had to be Ilfochrome because it's available in 50" wide rolls and I'm not even sure there are any other reversal color papers. Does anyone else still make a color reversal paper?

[Steven Barall]

What I really love is that it's not about the fact that he has a really big camera. He didn't build a really big camera so he could show people his really big camera. He didn't build the thing and then say: now what? He is a very thoughtful and smart guy. The camera is the result of his process. The camera didn't cause the photos, the camera is the result of the photos.

The best thing for me is that he made the point that he takes time to look at his photos because decisions he makes about them go on to inform his future work. I had a teacher, Tad Yamashiro, who made us look at every single photo, that is you had to print and finish every single exposure and if you shot 35mm then you had to print and finish every single frame, and then hang them up on a wall and sit there and deal with them.

The point is that you have to take responsibility for every single thing you do photographically. It's never acceptable to say that you don't know why you made an exposure. You always have to be smart and aware and take full responsibility. That's what this guy is doing. He's is thinking. Fantastic. Thinking is not the enemy of Art.

Cheers all.

[David A. Goldfarb]

David I missed the Ilfochrome bit but I can't imagine using Ilfochrome chemistry while rolling a 12 to 15 inch diameter drum on the floor. (See the video). And the cost!

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

Why not? When I was doing Cibachromes (when they were still called "Cibachromes"), I used drums on a rolling base. Rolling the drum on the floor or in a sink is another option, particularly if your drum is too big for the base. I still have those prints and I still have drums. I've been thinking I should make some more while I still can.

There's no other color reversal paper available anymore. It's possible to reversal process RA-4 paper, but it seems a lot trickier than just using Ilfochrome.

I figure he's spending around $100 an exposure, but if he's just making one exposure per outing, as he says he is in the video, that's not too bad for a day of photography. It's cheaper than 20x24" Polaroid.

[belle]

I loved watching John's thoughtful procedures and process, including the part when he slides down and wiggles his way out of his "make-shift trapped door." I wasn't expecting that. What a breath of fresh air. Thanks for posting the link.

[QT Luong]

That's a good way to realize the "unique image" idea !

If you are interested in his images, see his website at http://www.lightdark.com/

[Hollis]

Wonder what those images go for, if he even sells them? I would imagine one sale would probably cover his processing expenses for quite some time.

H.

[QT Luong]

I would guess mid four figures based on venues, size, and uniqueness. If you really want to know - and prove me wrong - you can contact his galleries (mentioned on his website).

[Daniel Grenier]

Is it just me? I find the process far more interesting than the results.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I suspect the effect of the large prints is different from that of the little pixelated YouTube videos.

[Daniel_Buck]

I suspect the effect of the large prints is different from that of the little pixelated YouTube videos.

indeed! as it is for most photos!

[Dave_B]

It's pretty cool that he is inventing his own way to produce images. It could hardly be more different than the DLSR approach. Anyone who says photography is what Nikon and Canon say it is should watch this video.
Cheers,
Dave B.

[Tony Lakin]

How does he manage upright shots;)

[Michael Cienfuegos]

How does he manage upright shots;)

with a crane???:D

[CG]

This fellow's work and process are fascinating. I an guessing his process is more intuitive than Steven Barall seems to think.


... The point is that you have to take responsibility for every single thing you do photographically. It's never acceptable to say that you don't know why you made an exposure. ...

I can't agree that it's never acceptable - maybe for some types of work - such a linear process just seems terribly limiting. I think some people work out their aesthetic on an intuitive level, and couldn't possibly explain why they moved the camera or chose such and such a subject and so on. I believe it may sometimes be up to others if they need a totally rationalized explanation for a given work. The belief that all valid work needs a fully thought out justification or narrative seems quite deadening to me. Think of Eikoh Hosoe, Sally Mann's "Deep South". A certain amount or rationalization would seem to make complex and enigmatic work less likely. I think too much linear thinking is frequently a killer of good works. I typically have no idea why a tiny change of viewpoint just improved an image, but I know it has been improved - but why? I just know which way to move the camera.


... You always have to be smart and aware and take full responsibility. That's what this guy is doing. He's is thinking. Fantastic. Thinking is not the enemy of Art. ...

There's so much technically perfect but visually dead work out there and I would blame a reliance on a thought out process.

I feel like people need to first get a firm grip on either their technique OR on their easthetic/intuitive faculties, then learn the counterpoint, Then, work long enough to make both available with little or no thought, as familiar as the palm or one's own hand, so that the image crystalizes before the thought. As long as one see's with one's intellect -one's thoughts - one is crippled. When one simply knows an image is good, before thought, better visual results start happening.

None of this is to denigrate whatever technique is needed to accomplish one's goals, but to say that the means of one's technique must be subsevient to one's ends.

Best,

C

[QT Luong]

In this episode of the series "mine is bigger than yours" see: http://www.cameratruck.net/

[C. D. Keth]

Kind of neat trailer camera but I'm not at all impressed by what he does with it. I like the images linked to in the post above this one. The texture given by the sponge development is interesting.