LF definition used by the forum
I am trying to understand the logic behind what is considered or not LF in this forum, according to the FAQ.
If I read it correctly:
- Direct positives, regardless the size, are not considered LF because it is paper, not film. Unknown to AA, most of his work with Polaroid is not considered LF here.
- Scanning backs listed as 4x5 are considered LF, even if the image captured size can be as small as 2.8x3.8".
- The film in a 665 (3.25x4.25") is not considered LF because is smaller than 3.5x4.7" (9x12cm)
I hope the discussion will help to improve our understanding of what we should or not consider LF.
Re: LF definition used by the forum
I don't understand how direct postives/paper negatives aren't LF. I mean it's shot in a LF camera and it's the same size as the film right? :confused:
Re: LF definition used by the forum
AFAIK, scanning backs are not considered LF by the forum moderators - even though it takes more time to capture an image than 8x10 :)
Kumar
Re: LF definition used by the forum
Agree. I do not know why the FAQ limits the media to "sheet film". IMHO, it should be open to any material and/or medium capable of capturing an image of certain size regardless of technology. I also don't understand why digital backs with smaller image area are included.
Re: LF definition used by the forum
Quote:
Originally Posted by
B.S.Kumar
AFAIK, scanning backs are not considered LF by the forum moderators - even though it takes more time to capture an image than 8x10 :)
Kumar
It's in the FAQ. It was a moderator the one who suggested to check the forum FAQ for the LF definition in the thread "May 2016 portraits".
Re: LF definition used by the forum
Well, if you look in the image sharing forum (LF), you will find threads that include paper negatives and direct positive images of 4x5 or larger. You will also see digital sensor back captures 4x5 or larger considered "LF".
Re: LF definition used by the forum
Quote:
Originally Posted by
onnect17
I am trying to understand the logic behind what is considered or not LF in this forum, according to the FAQ.
If I read it correctly:
- Direct positives, regardless the size, are not considered LF because it is paper, not film. Unknown to AA, most of his work with Polaroid is not considered LF here.
No, film, digital, or paper are acceptable, as long as the capture area is nominally 4x5 (or the European 9x12 "equivalent") or larger.
Most applications of direct positive paper (and, paper negatives) use 4x5 film holders for convenience, but the same size of paper taped in a shoe box would also suffice.
And, Ansel never posted here (he died before the forum was started), and no longer cares about where the LF line is drawn. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
onnect17
- Scanning backs listed as 4x5 are considered LF, even if the image captured size can be as small as 2.8x3.8".
No. Again, it is the actual capture area that matters, not marketing materials.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
onnect17
- The film in a 665 (3.25x4.25") is not considered LF because is smaller than 3.5x4.7" (9x12cm)
More or less. The 3¼ x 4¼ format is smaller than both 4x5 and the European 9x12, so it's not "LF" within the definition used by this forum. Plus, it has long been considered "medium format" - even when sheet-film cameras were commonly manufactured in that size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
onnect17
I hope the discussion will help to improve our understanding of what we should or not consider LF.
Everyone is free to consider whatever they wish as LF. The forum rules only govern where things are appropriately posted on this forum.
It should be noted that this issue has been "litigated" numerous times over the years, with arguments all over the map. We think the current definition of "LF" (established in September of 2014 ) used for this forum is pretty clear, and is consistent with traditional definitions used within the industry. We do, however, accommodate smaller formats in selected sub-forums.
Re: LF definition used by the forum
Agree with the approach but if I am reading it correctly, it does not match the FAQ. Here's a copy and paste:
...Commonly accepted definitions base large format photography on 4"x5" and larger sheet film (or the 9x12 cm metric equivalent), regardless of the style of camera being used. This is the definition we will use. We would also consider a digital back with a nominal sensor size of 4"x5" or larger to be LF, as well, regardless of technology....
Re: LF definition used by the forum
Quote:
Originally Posted by
onnect17
Agree with the approach but if I am reading it correctly, it does not match the FAQ.
Can you clarify specifically what it is that you see as a mismatch?
Re: LF definition used by the forum
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Oren Grad
Can you clarify specifically what it is that you see as a mismatch?
Sure. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, the use of the term "sheet film" should be replaced by "material or medium".
Also making sure all the images from the digital backs marketed as 4x5 are forwarded to the MF area because none have a scanning area equal or larger than 9x12cm.