Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

[Vick Ko]

Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

It pains me to sell my Tech Master. I thought I sold it once but the buyer backed out. I'm trying again. And right after I had a first winning bidder on the Master, I bought a Tech V from a local used camera store, out of seller's regret. Fortunately they took it back and refunded my money when I told them that the sale of the Master fell through.

A couple years ago, I sold all my 4x5 lenses, except for a couple.

I've only shot the camera a couple times in the last 2 years. Is that the biggest sign - the low usage means I'm not an LF shooter?

I mostly shoot 35mm, and medium format.

For those that got out of LF, what was the sign for you, that LF wasn't for you?

....Vick

[John Kasaian]

A camera is a tool, not club. Generally, you'll do your best (or at least come away more satisfied with how you've spent your time) when working with the tools which give you the most pleasure.
I'm not sure usage is a good indicator.
A fly fisherman may only get on a stream a few times a year. A private pilot may actually log only 30 or 40 hours a year. A commercial photographer likely spends the bulk of his time shooting digital cameras and only gets to play with the big ones for his personal use.
That dosen't mean the fisherman or pilot or commercial photographer isn't a real fisherman, pilot, or large format photographer, does it?
Call yourself a photographer and call it good

[Brian Ellis]

I almost never used my LF camera the first year or so after I bought it. Part of the reason for me was that I didn't like the particular camera I bought for my first camera (a somewhat heavy, complex camera). After I replaced it with a lighter, simpler LF camera that I found easier to set up, take down, and carry around I started using that camera occasionally. And as I used it more I became more comfortable with it, which led to using it even more, etc. etc. So if there are things you don't like about your particular camera you could always try replacing it with one that doesn't have the problems you find with your present camera.

OTOH, if you just don't like the whole process of LF photography (loading film, carrying the camera around, using movements, etc.) then I'd suggest just forgetting about LF and stick with what you like. Despite what some here seem to think, using a LF camera isn't a badge of honor or some great achievement that only a select few can attain. Anybody can use a large format camera. The trick is making excellent photographs regardless of the format used to make them.

[Ramiro Elena]

I've been getting signs to go off photography altogether lately. In fact I was thinking about this for the past month.
It seems like whenever I stop to photograph something, people and vehicles seem to show up in my scene all of a sudden. Problems I had never experienced before start ruining my photos. A light leak here, a dark slide that slips down blocking part of the negative there... developing problems... quite depressing I have to say.

[E. von Hoegh]

Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

It pains me to sell my Tech Master. I thought I sold it once but the buyer backed out. I'm trying again. And right after I had a first winning bidder on the Master, I bought a Tech V from a local used camera store, out of seller's regret. Fortunately they took it back and refunded my money when I told them that the sale of the Master fell through.

A couple years ago, I sold all my 4x5 lenses, except for a couple.

I've only shot the camera a couple times in the last 2 years. Is that the biggest sign - the low usage means I'm not an LF shooter?

I mostly shoot 35mm, and medium format.

For those that got out of LF, what was the sign for you, that LF wasn't for you?

....Vick

If you like to make images that only a large negative and movements can accomplish, then you use a large negative and a camera with movements. There is no such thing as a "large format photographer", there are however photographers who use large format cameras because that is the tool that allows them to make the photographs they like making. If you identify yourelf as "a large format photographer" then there is a possibility that another agenda is at work, whether you realise it or not.

[Bill Burk]

Hi Vick,

I most value a crisp looking scenic on 11x14. 35mm rarely delivers it but when everything falls in place it comes close with a little softness, 6x9 has delivered it on occasion but lately it too has softness. 4x5 always, always comes through.

I took a recent hiatus and shot 35mm and 120, so recently reconfirmed my feelings on this...

Because it delivers the look, easily, I remain committed to 4x5 black and white.

[DrTang]

Last time I quit..it was because a pee stick had an X



so I sold all my stuff.


I've slowly been trying to get back - most based upon a concept of taking portraits with a Linhof Tech 5x7

[Old-N-Feeble]

Try a lightweight 4x5 with Graflok back and a 6x12cm RFH.

[Brian C. Miller]

"How do you know you need to piss?" No, I don't remember what famous painter said that when he was asked by a novice about being an artist. You need it because you really do need it!

I took up large format cameras because a box camera (SLR) could not do what I needed to be done. I wanted more of a scene in focus, and the only device that gives me that is the large format camera. Nothing else. Movements are king. And that large negative? Icing on the cake. The camera is just a much of a paintbrush as is a lens.

Vick, you picked up a LF camera for a reason. What it gear acquisition syndrome? Was it, "_____ used one of these, so me too?"

I think that what you've done that holds you back the most is that you are putting a label on yourself. No more labels! You photograph. To paraphrase Deepak Chopra, "You are a human, photographing."

[Vaughn]

I was using my only camera (Rolleiflex) like a view camera -- on a pod, on f/22, on "B", taking landscapes. So when I used a 4x5 for the first time in a photo class, it just seemed right.

Vaughn

[Jay DeFehr]

I'm still searching. I recently traded my Deardorff V8 for a Sinar P kit. I lived quite happily with the V8 for several years, but recently, having made many changes in my life, I feel the need for stability and precision. I want to work in a controlled, studio environment, on project - based work. This is all 180 degrees from everything I've ever done. If you don't feel your tools fit, changing them might improve your work.

[Peter Gomena]

I went on view camera hiatus for several years while my children were young. I've come back to using them in the past 5 years because I have more time, and I'm involved with a group that gets me out to photograph once a month. I still use my MF cameras, but for some situations, a view camera is just the better tool.

Peter Gomena

[ROL]

A) Was there a sign for you that you were a LF photographer?


After viewing an informal personal "portfolio" of my existing work, a very well known and regarded LF photographer commented that I "had pushed medium format as far as it could go", further suggesting if normal view cameras were insufficient, I should give 11X14 a try.


B) Was there a sign for you that you weren't a LF photographer?


Looking at and digesting those signs a lot over the past few years: the X-Rays of my abused arthritic knees.

[ROL]

I was using my only camera (Rolleiflex) like a view camera -- on a pod, on f/22, on "B", taking landscapes.

That pretty much happened with me to, using the MF as if it were a view camera.

[Ken Lee]

"There is no such thing as a "large format photographer", there are however photographers who use large format cameras because that is the tool that allows them to make the photographs they like making."

"The trick is making excellent photographs regardless of the format used to make them."

To those superb answers I would add: It can be fun to switch from one kind of equipment to another. It can also be instructive. Each approach tends to improve the other.

[AF-ULF]

A few years ago I stopped to photograph an abandoned farm house. The only camera I had with me was my Mamiya 7 II, a camera that I absolutely love. I was shooting it on a tripod, using slow film, all the things necessary to maximize quality. The distant shots were fine. Nevertheless, when I moved in close, I kept getting frustrated because the Mamiya does not have movements. I would set up the camera, look at the scene and think how I could make it better if I could just use a little front rise or fall. If I had my view camera and the ability to shift, I could square that doorway and the window behind it. After a short while, I gave up with the Mamiya and drove into town to get my view camera. For me, I had learned to see in terms of using a view camera and the creative possibilities offered by using movements. Not having them frustrated me. I now keep my view camera with me in the car.

[E. von Hoegh]

"There is no such thing as a "large format photographer", there are however photographers who use large format cameras because that is the tool that allows them to make the photographs they like making."

"The trick is making excellent photographs regardless of the format used to make them."

To those superb answers I would add: It can be fun to switch from one kind of equipment to another. It can also be instructive. Each approach tends to improve the other.

I didn't realise just what a superb job 35mm does until I started using 4x5 and 8x10.

[Vick Ko]

Ha ha ha ha

The first pee stick put an end to my darkroom. That room became my older boy's bedroom.
The second one came almost 2 years ago. Lots of digi-PS for him, but no LF portraits.

Yeah, I understand.

Vick




Last time I quit..it was because a pee stick had an X

so I sold all my stuff.


I've slowly been trying to get back - most based upon a concept of taking portraits with a Linhof Tech 5x7

[Vaughn]

While I understand what is meant, if there is no such thing as a large format photographer, then in follows that there is no such thing as a photographer. They are just labels.
I am a large format photographer who just developed 18 rolls of 120 film...:)

[E. von Hoegh]

While I understand what is meant, if there is no such thing as a large format photographer, then in follows that there is no such thing as a photographer. They are just labels.
I am a large format photographer who just developed 18 rolls of 120 film...:)

"They are just labels..." That's my point. "I'm a large format photographer"... what does that mean? Do you take pictures of large formats? "Photographer" isn't a label, but a description the same as "watchmaker" or "surgeon". What I mean is that a photographer uses light to make images. The specific eguipment is subject to the type of images one wishes to make.

When did you ever hear someone say they were a 35mm photographer? Or - God forbid - a small format photographer?

[toolbox]

Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?

It pains me to sell my Tech Master. I thought I sold it once but the buyer backed out. I'm trying again. And right after I had a first winning bidder on the Master, I bought a Tech V from a local used camera store, out of seller's regret. Fortunately they took it back and refunded my money when I told them that the sale of the Master fell through.

A couple years ago, I sold all my 4x5 lenses, except for a couple.

I've only shot the camera a couple times in the last 2 years. Is that the biggest sign - the low usage means I'm not an LF shooter?

I mostly shoot 35mm, and medium format.

For those that got out of LF, what was the sign for you, that LF wasn't for you?

....Vick

The sign that it was for me: I tried it and it was fun.
The sign that it won't be for me: When it ceases to be fun.

I shoot some of everything, and it's all got it's place. I like the results from film, but I also enjoy the process. If the day comes when it's no longer fun, I'll just quit doing it...or take a break. I've had a few hobbies I've taken a couple of years off of because I was losing interest. Came back a couple years later and it was fun again :). I don't shoot a ton of LF, but I always enjoy it when I do.

[Vaughn]

Nope, "photographer" is just another label. It say what type of artist I am. And "artist" is just another label, saying what type of person I am (as is "old", "tall", "white", "bearded" -- dang, I must be a left coast photographer!)

PS..."35mm photographer" use to be the default label -- now it is "digital photographer". No need to add the labels...LOL!

[Jay DeFehr]

"They are just labels..." That's my point. "I'm a large format photographer"... what does that mean? Do you take pictures of large formats? "Photographer" isn't a label, but a description the same as "watchmaker" or "surgeon". What I mean is that a photographer uses light to make images. The specific eguipment is subject to the type of images one wishes to make.

When did you ever hear someone say they were a 35mm photographer? Or - God forbid - a small format photographer?

But "watchmaker" and "surgeon" are labels, too. A label wouldn't be very useful if it wasn't descriptive of what it labeled. It seems to me the label "large format Photographer", like most labels, is only as useful as the distinction it makes is important. Large format photographer is a subset of photographer, just like B&W photographer, digital photographer, fine art photographer, etc. These labels can be useful when referring specifically to the subset labelled. I don't think anyone, you included, is confused by the label, large format photographer, which refers to photographers who use large format equipment. Why make more of it than there is?

[AF-ULF]

There are a lot of people out there who refer to themselves as portrait photographers. They don't spend a lot of time taking photographs of portraits.

[Vaughn]

There are a lot of people out there who refer to themselves as portrait photographers. They don't spend a lot of time taking photographs of portraits.

Well, there was that person who was a Weston photographer (she had a show of photos of Weston photos)...LOL!

But the use of these labels also is dependent upon whom one is communicating with -- I do not use the label "large format" when talking to people who do not know the difference (and who are not interested in the difference). So labels are useful in communication, and not so useful in the picking of nits,

[Preston]

I am a Large Format photographer because my waist size is bigger than when I was a Small Format photographer. :D

My 4x5 is the only camera I use...and I wouldn't have it any other way, thank you.

--P

[Ed Bray]

I have only recently moved to large format photography as I found I really enjoyed using movements with my Fuji GX680 and wanted to take it a step further. As I have never been a prolific shooter and frequently had to waste the remaining frames on a film (either by not using them or shooting frames to use them up), I have since discovered a real pleasure in being able to shoot just what I need and process it when I want, so I can choose to process just 4 shots from whatever I have taken and process the others (if any) when I choose.

Oh, and the quality, did I mention the Quality? I have just received some Adox ISO25 film so really looking forward to trying that.

[rdenney]

I'm a large-format photographer because I know how to be a large-format photographer ("learning how" would do just as well--we are all learning no matter how much we think we know). My skills are limited, but they still required no small effort to attain, and at times I'm compelled to express them. Not having any large-format equipment would not affect very much of the photography that I do, but I would certainly feel as though I had just lost a vital tool. Tools, and the skill to use them, are hard to get and easy to throw away. If I sold the camera that I enjoy but rarely use, what would I get in return? A few dollars? That would be gone in a heartbeat--probably to pay for something I wouldn't even remembering buying a year from now.

Rick "who is not ruled by stuff--either the desire for it or the false guilt of having a lot of it" Denney

[slackercruster]

I gave up my 4 x 5 gear ages ago. Found this forum by chance when I searched for dye transfer color printing info. When I sold my 4 x 5 gear I replaced it with Hassy 500 and SWC. Sold that off as well. But that was in the 70's. But my main cam was a Nikon F.

Now am all cmos dslr digital...Pentax! But I would like a larger format Pentax 645D if I hit the lotto!.

Why did I give up LF?

4 x 5 was just too cumbersome for me with the type of work I did.

http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv219/keepitlow456/Photography%20BW/img001.jpg

I took this in the 70's with a Toyo view and Super-Angulon 65mm or 75mm?

Here is a thread with some of my work from the 1970's...(nsfw)

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/183595-not-work-safe-hollywood-1970s.html

I hope to get another thread going called 'L.A...1970's' in a few months. Have lots of old 4 x 5 negs that need to be scanned. My goal this year is to scan my best work.

Then next year go back and spot them and fine tune the images. After that, it is years more scanning of the lesser work. (I still need to figure out 'how to' spot, dodge and burn em! Just started to learn dig in Feb 2012.)

In any case, yes, I sometimes miss the old 4 x 5.

I remember buying some old military glass plates expired from the late 1940's at Freestyle when I lived in L.A. in the 70's. The plates were expired maybe 30 years and still good. I used to project on them and make large format BW positives with them. People were always amazed and couldn't figure out how I got the image on a sheet of glass.

I guess we should not complain about the bulky little 4 x5 though. Look a what this guy carried on his back!

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-technique/181819-reviews-photography-books-dvds.html

[Chris Wong]

There have been times during my years of shooting 4 x 5 large format whether I was suited for the task. The frustrations of missing a step leading to the exposure (i.e. forgetting to reset the aperture after opening it for focussing) or the weight of the whole setup or the time to set up a shot has at times had me questioning whether it was worth it to shoot large format. After getting back a properly exposed tranny and being able to use the movements of the camera and printing it to frame makes me forget the frustrations that I went through. So, to answer your question; yes, I am a large format photographer.

[MIke Sherck]

I spent a lot of years trying to get the kind of landscape prints I wanted from 35mm and a wide variety of materials, including spending a lot of time with Tech Pan film. The first time I looked through a ground glass I knew that this was something I had to know more about and the first time I fixed perspective with camera movements, I knew this was for me.

That said, I have a Rolleiflex New Standard dating from 1939 which I dearly, dearly love and my dream 35mm camera, a Maxxum 800si, which thanks to digital I was finally able to afford a few years ago. In fact, the local astronomy club's star party is this weekend (I'm just home to shower and change clothes,) and I'm taking the Minolta back to the party with me to grab some "telescope porn" portraits. :)

Mike

[Brian Ellis]

Doesn't look like you're getting many answers that are responsive to your question. Maybe a large format photography forum isn't the best place to ask people why they aren't large format photographers. :)

[E. von Hoegh]

Doesn't look like you're getting many answers that are responsive to your question. Maybe a large format photography forum isn't the best place to ask people why they aren't large format photographers. :)

I was waiting for that.... (smiling smiley)

[Ari]

Yes...and no.
I just keep going because I don't know what else to do; when I'm in the mood, I'll take the 4x5 or digi or MF, depending on what there is to shoot.
If you use LF only a few times a year, don't get discouraged about it, because that's exactly how many times you need to use it.

[slackercruster]

Doesn't look like you're getting many answers that are responsive to your question. Maybe a large format photography forum isn't the best place to ask people why they aren't large format photographers. :)

+++++

[mlatterich]

I usually bring along my medium format camera, wherever I go. After developing and scanning/printing I often think - should have taken that in LF because of sharpness, resolution, perspective control, etc. I then take along one of my large formats and revisit the same locations.

[Jody_S]

I don't consider myself a 'large format photographer'. Never mind that I just spent 2 days with a Deardorff.

I make it a point of taking photos with every camera that passes through my hands, though I've so far shunned most consumer-grade Kodak gear and things like 110 and Disc formats. Not that I plan on never taking photos with a Disc camera, I actually have the film ready to go; I'm just not sure my lab will be able to process it. Going out of my comfort zone, away from my 'preferred' gear, has been a revelation to me. I want to be able to create an image with whatever tools just happen to be at hand. The tool, the situation, guides the process; but if I look, there is always a photo lurking somewhere.

[Kimberly Anderson]

This is the sign that I *am* a large-format photographer.

73898

All of the huge amount of work, expense, pain-in-the-butt factor, mistakes, successes, challenges, home-made equipment, internal self-doubt and questioning from outside observers all disappears when I see large contact prints in the wash that make me just giggle like a school girl and smile. It is ALL worth it and it becomes crystal clear when I'm looking at the finished print in the wash that all of the trouble that I suffered through was me deciding that I wanted to...and NEEDED to...use a big camera. These are 8x20 prints that will be part of an exhibit I am having in June of this year. All of the work is film based from Great Salt Lake that has never been exhibited before.

[rince]

Hi,

I can only second what was said here before. It is neither a batch of honor, nor a achievement. If you prefer working in other formats what so ever, by all means do it. It is not about the tools we use, well for me sometimes it is not even about the image I taker, more often than not it is the whole process that has me under it's spell.
A successful day out shooting is for me a day I had fun doing what I love, if it's awarded with nice image that is great, if not, I hopefully learned something, but for sure I enjoyed my time.
The reason for me to shoot LF is actually a lot about the absolute need to slow down. Not going out with 5 rolls of film and spray and pray. The need to think about your image and the vision behind it you which to convey and it feels much more organic to me. I feel in total control of what I am doing, it is more direct and closer to me. In the end you are the only one who can decide if this is the right experience for you and there is no judgement in preferring a different format. Don't sweat it, do whatyourhearttells you is right. There is absolutelyzeroneed for justification either way.

Dennis

[slackercruster]

Hi,

I can only second what was said here before. It is neither a batch of honor, nor a achievement. If you prefer working in other formats what so ever, by all means do it. It is not about the tools we use, well for me sometimes it is not even about the image I taker, more often than not it is the whole process that has me under it's spell.
A successful day out shooting is for me a day I had fun doing what I love, if it's awarded with nice image that is great, if not, I hopefully learned something, but for sure I enjoyed my time.
The reason for me to shoot LF is actually a lot about the absolute need to slow down. Not going out with 5 rolls of film and spray and pray. The need to think about your image and the vision behind it you which to convey and it feels much more organic to me. I feel in total control of what I am doing, it is more direct and closer to me. In the end you are the only one who can decide if this is the right experience for you and there is no judgement in preferring a different format. Don't sweat it, do whatyourhearttells you is right. There is absolutelyzeroneed for justification either way.

Dennis

Luv it...spray and pray! That sums me up. Well, maybe not that much praying nowadays. LF photogs seem more serious from what I can see.

[David R Munson]

I came to LF when I was 15 and built a Bender 4x5 kit, and later bought a Linhof monorail. When I was 17 I bought and restored a Deardorff 8x10. Got out of it once maybe 4 or 5 years ago when I was super-depressed, frustrated with everything, in a horrible relationship, and basically my life was broken. I periodically regretted it immensely, but mostly tried to put it out of mind until recently (within the last year), when I bought a Chamonix from a good friend.

Coming back to it has proven to me that I never should have parted ways with view cameras. It isn't my most-used camera. I have 35mm, 645, and digital gear that I use more often, but when there's a shot I want to do on 4x5, nothing else will do. Pretty much nobody outside a handful of my photographer friends understand what I mean when I tell them that it's the simplest, most direct way to make a photograph that I know. There's no noise, no complication, just a straightforward system that, once you've internalized how things work, will pretty much always do what you tell it.

I've come to acknowledge that the deliberate nature of it fits how I like to approach many subjects, and that's enough for me. I have to think about what I'm doing less with a view camera than with any other sort of camera. I like that.

[Trius]

I'm not sure exactly when it was, tho likely it was early/mid '80s. It's really strange, but many (if not most) of the LF/4X5 exposures just feel right. Not that the 35mm are all crap, but the "keeper" percentage is different. Which means that 4x5 is a really good, if costly, teacher for miniature work. ;)

[Trius]

David: Jay Bender, Bloomington, IL, ca 1982

74010

[Leigh]

It's really strange, but many (if not most) of the LF/4X5 exposures just feel right. Not that the 35mm are all crap, but the "keeper" percentage is different.
I think it's because you put more thought and effort into an LF exposure than into those done in smaller formats.

I shoot every format from Minox through 8x10.
Each has its own unique character, and drives a particular mind set and discipline.

When I envision a shooting project I seldom need to cogitate on which format to use.
That's obvious from the subject and desired results.

Given that the LF images take much more time and effort to create than smaller ones,
it's not surprising that the keeper percentage is higher.
You just put more thought into doing it right in the first place.

I do tend to vacillate between formats, sometimes letting LF age and mellow for months at a time, but I always go back to it.

- Leigh

[rdenney]

I do tend to vacillate between formats, sometimes letting LF age and mellow for months at a time, but I always go back to it.

I like the way you said this, and it speaks for me.


...once you've internalized how things work, will pretty much always do what you tell it.

David's point brings an analogy to mind. In the tuba-playing world, the Alexander tuba is legendary among those who came of age as orchestral tubists in the 60's and 70's. But they are bearish to play in tune, requiring considerable effort to learn slide pulls and alternate fingerings. One current player who switched from an Alex to the currently popular York design said to me, back right after the switch in 1984 or so, that they York required one to relax and the horn to the work. The Alex, on the other hand, could do anything, but you had to make it happen.

Pros don't often use Alexes any more, but they still love the sound they produce.

Rick "not equating difficulty with artistic value, however" Denney

[pdmoylan]

There are those special situations where the light and opportunity say LF and movements. It is partly wanting to say something with great resolution and detail, but also controlling the end result with refined movements. It is at once a meditative process on an impulsive need. The "vision" thing that is part if the process, seeing in LF is seeing the possibility of subtle details and its impact.

For me, LF should be employed where one wants to say something compelling that cannot be expressed in smaller sized images. In other words, if you can say it in digital slr than that is the right choice. In my experience, there are simply too many situations when a smaller format does not produce sufficient detail. On the other hand, I shoot digital as a backup but am always rather disappointed in the prints.

[graywolf]

I have a 4oz hammer, an 8oz one, a 16oz one, a 25oz one, and a 4# one. I do not use that 4# hammer a lot, should I sell it?

Nope, every so often it is the only one that will do the job, I need to do. The same with cameras.

Oh, and because I have that 4# hammer, does that make me a large format hammerer? How about the guy that has a 16# sledge hammer? Funny, isn't it, when I start defining myself by the hammer I use it is very silly sounding.

The strangest thing is that I do not even consider someone who is not involved in the craft of photography (darkroom work) a photographer, but an imager (someone who records images). Note, in that I am going by the process you are involved in, not the tools you use to do it. (I am, however, quite aware that 99.9999% of of the people out there with cameras do not agree with me, so no need to flame me.) Most of my life I have been an imager, even with film, but every once in a while I do get into the darkroom to do some B&W stuff.

I will say to that OP, that the kind of images you make has a lot to do with which tools you use. Since you can get tilt & shift lenses for your digital or 35mm camera, a view camera is not strictly necessary for movements either like it was a few decades ago. So, the final answer seems to be image quality, digital has overtaken 35mm there, and is rapidly moving in on 120's territory, 4x5 and larger still seems to have an edge there. The other thing about the view camera is the way of working: slow and methodical as opposed to the frenzied shooting of the DSLR crowd. Of course, there is a large area of overlap between the two styles.

[Wayne Crider]

"Was there a sign for you that you weren't (or were) a LF photographer?"

If you don't want to pick up the camera and use it, that's the sign. As far as being a "photographer", that's questionable.

I'm on hiatus from 4x5 shooting small format. It began 2 years back when I started shooting bands, and after that never came back. The portrait and landscape threads here are my vicarious experiences. I just don't have to pay for gas or walk that far in some cases.

[Scotty230358]

I, initially, regretted getting into LF because of my first field camera. There was nothing intrinsically wrong with it. It just did not suit me. When I bought my lastest camera, after a lot of research and playing with one my interest in LF was rekindled to the point that I have not shot 35mm for over 5 years and MF for over 2. I enjoy LF now.

[Henry Larson]

My only problem with LFP was the cost of film.
I created an adapter to use my Canon20d as a digital back on my Sinar F and now that is virtually the only camers thatI use.
I am a doodler with pictures and enjoy the artistry of the tilts and shifts and rises, falls and swings of the view camera.
As long as I am able I will continue to ust it.

[Jim Andrada]

I feel like a LARGE format photographer because every time I use my 4 x 5 I feel like it is too small - although it IS handy to take on the road. Love my 5 x 7 Linhof that I bought new in 1970 or so - it ISN'T too small. And 8 x 10 ISN'T too big. I really like thinking about the image before I set up the camera and again when I see it on the Ground Glass - I find it really relaxing to spend an hour or two on each exposure. Or more.

Oh yeah - I have two Alexander Tubas as well. Maybe that makes me a large format tubist or something. They sound so damned good that it's worth fighting the strange intonation and all the tricks and oddball fingerings one has to employ to get the desired result. Just like the cameras I guess

74430

1959 Chevy...8 x 10 Linhof...Wollensak 159mm...Tri-X

[John Kasaian]

I feel like a LARGE format photographer because every time I use my 4 x 5 I feel like it is too small - although it IS handy to take on the road. Love my 5 x 7 Linhof that I bought new in 1970 or so - it ISN'T too small. And 8 x 10 ISN'T too big. I really like thinking about the image before I set up the camera and again when I see it on the Ground Glass - I find it really relaxing to spend an hour or two on each exposure. Or more.

Oh yeah - I have two Alexander Tubas as well. Maybe that makes me a large format tubist or something. They sound so damned good that it's worth fighting the strange intonation and all the tricks and oddball fingerings one has to employ to get the desired result. Just like the cameras I guess

74430

1959 Chevy...8 x 10 Linhof...Wollensak 159mm...Tri-X
Profoundly put, Jim!:cool:

[Jim Andrada]

Thanks - I have my moments of profundity, few as they may be. Moments of profanity on the other hand...

Maybe I should call myself a large large format photographer. Which is why I play Tuba. I was one of only two 4th grade students in our school big enough to pick one up.

[rdenney]

My band director when I started saw me walk through the door, and immediately hit the "Potential Tuba Player Action Plan Alarm" button. What followed was classic educational manipulation at its finest. My mother, having come along to make sure that whatever I chose would fit in the car (my sister's 'cello's pin had poked a hole in the door panel of my mother's beloved 1963 Valiant), was hopelessly outclassed by the onslaught. She just walked away shaking her head, and told my father we'd need a bigger car.

It was another 15 years before I even owned my own tuba, and 18 or 20 years after that before a real large-format tuba came my way (a Holton 345). But the pattern of bigger-is-better was set early on.

I was the only guy in college to gravitate to the Linhof owned by the architecture school where I was studying, and the pull of that gravity has never diminished, despite my occasional resistance to its effects.

By the way, Jim, now that you have exposed your affinity for Alexander tubas, you've forced me to remember way back, probably 7 or 8 years ago and longer, when you were active on Tubenet. You and I had a number of good conversations on the old Tubenet, which I miss. It is a small world indeed.

Rick "who knew that name was familiar" Denney

[Vaughn]

Did anyone else strap the case of their university's 4x5 rail camera on top of his Kelty pack and head up into the high country? (I think it was a Linhof) I probably looked pretty silly, but my legs could get me anywhere in those days! Probably 1980 give or take a year.

PS -- we had a couple of Valiants of that vintage -- my dad bought them on auction from the City of Los Angeles. Push "P" for Park!

[rdenney]

Did anyone else strap the case of their university's 4x5 rail camera on top of his Kelty pack and head up into the high country? (I think it was a Linhof) I probably looked pretty silly, but my legs could get me anywhere in those days! Probably 1980 give or take a year.

I still have the Kelty pack I made to hold my Calumet 45NX, with the rail crosswise across the top opening and the body hanging down into the pack. Heavy SOB. I hiked down into the Maze at Canyonlands with it, but the film was all ruined by something (radiation? chemistry?). I should print those pictures as an "alternate process".

My legs might still be up to it, but the lungs to which they are attached couldn't possibly!

Rick "never again" Denney

[David Lobato]

I still have the Kelty pack I made to hold my Calumet 45NX, with the rail crosswise across the top opening and the body hanging down into the pack. Heavy SOB. I hiked down into the Maze at Canyonlands with it, but the film was all ruined by something (radiation? chemistry?). I should print those pictures as an "alternate process".

My first 4x5 was a Toyo 45E monorail, got in a trade for a mountain bike. I packed it in a very worn Lowe Alpine Systems rucksack with the rail sticking out the top. Carried it several places and the camera was actually nice to use in the field. Broke the ground glass at Bryce Canyon and had nasty shards inside the pack among all the other stuff. That led to a new Toyo 45A with its folding rear hood, which I still have from 1987.