Printable View
Dear Eddo,
You will probably enjoy the change...
I captured these images in 2007.
jim k
http://largeformatgroupimages.jimkit...s/07081805.jpg
Willow Valley, Alberta, Canada
http://largeformatgroupimages.jimkit...s/07042108.jpg
Jumping Pound Road, Alberta, Canada
I've seen plenty of work made with LF cameras that didn't look like it was made with them. Poor vision, focus, and technique are usually the culprits.
I have quite a few photos in different threads here, and you might also find them at my homepage www.vasina.net, especially in the "Serene Landscape portfolio". If you have a look, I hope you'll enjoy it.
And I can also clearly see the difference between 35mm shots, MF shots and LF shots. The ones from LF that fail to be clearly better do fail because of my poor execution, or wind or something alike. And even my wife is able to see the difference (and she is not a photographer at all, after several years of explaining, she still has difficulty understanding the meaning and importance of bull's eye's centered composition, ISO, aperture, handholdability and time - she understands them separately, but can't cope with them all at once).
I've shown this one before, but sometimes it is fun to photograph naked girls and landscape at the same time!
Bill...If you can't see the difference, then there is no difference for you. Those who are color blind may not see any difference between red and green...but others can easily see the difference. Cameras are tools, and the tools shape the image.
Fallen Redwood, Nude
Prairie Creek Redwood State Park
4x5 negative, scanned silver gelatin print
Edited in Nov 2020 to say ouch...what did I write?!
Bill, hard as I've tried I've never quite managed to achieve satisfying quality landscape images from pro Nikon 35mm gear... well 'unless' the degree of enlargement was kept very modest ie around 8x10'' max... 35mm just wasn't happening for me. Dont get me wrong I've had a few 12x16 prints from 35mm that are note worthy but for me they are the exception. That changed however with my first print from a 5x4 negative, to my eyes the difference is unavoidable. I'm really moved by well composed images that contain incredible sharpness and a crispness of detail... but I have to confess that I'm one of those sad guys that cant resist taking a loupe to his prints. I am however seriously considering picking up a 6x6, a Blad's looking like the main contender, I suspect then that the difference between 6x6 and 5x4 will prove to be very narrow at least up to something like 16x12''.
Recently I was thumbing my way through Galen Rowel's book 'Mountain Light In Search of the Dynamic Landscape' a book full of both fantastic images and enlightening words. For me the book is a perfect example of both the strengths and limitations of using 35mm gear... I know its probably a daft thing to say because the guy's format of choice was a small camera, but I couldn't help thinking...''man if only these images could have been captured on a large sheet of film''!
"I fail to see any difference between landscapes taken with Large Format equipment, and anything else. It's just a lot more work with the camera, and somewhat less in the darkroom".
Such a wise guy. Posting that, on the Large Format Forum ! Why not post something similar, on the Leica Forum ? Just substitute the words Large Format, with Leica.
Better yet, you could post something like this, which comes from Ken Rockwell...
"A $50 used Yashica-MAT 124G (a medium format camera) is sharper than any Nikon, Leica or Canon, and a $200, 50 year old 4 x 5" Crown Graphic (large format) is sharper than any Hasselblad".
There is a great more to the quality and effectiveness of a final print than just the micro-sharpness under a loupe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Lee
B'lieve that advice came from Richard Ritter and me. We find the abovementioned exercise enormously useful to helping develop one's eye. Judging exposure is a by-product. It, and variations, are in my book.Quote:
Originally Posted by kev curry
My 35mm stuff is printed no larger than 5x7. 35mm can be incredibly useful to develop one's eye, too. And, homage to friend Bill, it can also be FUN!
Landscape examples are at the Circle of the Sun web site, link below. Dial-up internet here in the jungles of New Hampshire preclude me from posting to the forum. Dial-up is NOT fun...
While there may be some excessive fetishism among some of us who use large format (the magic of film developed in leprechaun sweat, and prints made on manna with the tears of fairies) I am constantly amazed by how much more there is in a lf negative and print than one from mf. I've been printing a lot for a show in April from both mf and lf negs, and the latter are a real treat. No difference? There is for me!
weeds