Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,789

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    I cheat. 8x10 is so much easier in terms of finding film, cheap holders, etc. I crop in printing. I have the WP frame marks on the Wehman and Ebony. And it's a full 6-1/2" x 8-1/2". The reason I do this is the price and availability of holders and film without cutting, which I'm not terribly averse to, but plug-and-play is just easier. And I have a WP camera and some old holders.

    Before you put a lot of money in a custom back and holders, take an 8x10" piece of paper and draw a 6-1/2" x 8-1/2" rectangle in it. Then evaluate how much you pay to lose that small amount. The point is you can shoot 8x10 and cut the negative down A LOT cheaper than you can shoot WP unless you just luck out on a bunch of usable holders and a camera.

    Cheers, Steve

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland, US
    Posts
    211

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    Steve,
    That's the most practical thing I've read all day. Sometimes I need to wake up and just try the most straightforward solution. I'd put off the notion of buying an 8x10 because lenses that cover the format are big, heavy, and expensive, but if I'm cropping a little bit to WP size, then I could probably abuse a cheap Tessar meant for 5x7. Thinking it through helps!

    Thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread. I'm really grateful that I can turn to a place like this forum and receive so many thoughtful, kind, and intelligent replies. That's quite rare on the internet.

    Sal Santamaura, buying Mike's kit is a very sensible approach. And, wallet factors aside, one I'd pursue. I had forgotten your part in the tale of the whole plate resurgence - a really neat story.

    Steven Tribe, refitting a plate holder to be the ground glass is a brilliant idea! Boy, I wish I'd thought of that. Totally solves the problem of how to construct a spring back! Fantastic!

    IanG & everyone else who mentioned a combination of patience and time: good point. I've got plenty of the second, and maybe enough of the first.

    Will

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,789

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    Will,

    The IC of WP is 270mm and 8x10 310mm, in round numbers. For 40mm in difference, you won't find much difference in lenses, because if a lens covers WP, nearly all of them will cover 8x10 too. It's a "twofer" because the "rectangles" aren't much different in diagonal. They ARE different in shape, and I like the WP proportion better. You might find some lenses that will cover WP but not 8x10, but aside from portrait lenses and petzvals, probably not many. 240mm plasmats might be the exception unless you're looking at 75 degree lenses.

    8x10 lenses don't have to be expensive, any run of the mill f/5.6 plasmat over 240mm will do fine. And run of the mill f/5.6 240s will likely cover WP.

    Cheers, Steve

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland, US
    Posts
    211

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    Steve,

    Ah, I see. Yes, that makes sense. And, 240mm seems pretty close to the right focal length for portrait work on 4x5, so, doubly useful.

    Will

  5. #15
    Do or do not. There is no try.
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Northeastern USA
    Posts
    983

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    One point about cutting down 8x10 to WP - the two cuts are the same - 1.5" on both the long and short sides. You can also easily preserve the notches.

    So far I still have the luxury of WP film in the freezer so haven't had to resort to this myself.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Portland, OR USA
    Posts
    747

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    My 210mm Symmar-S covers WP with room for a little movement. My 120mm Super Angulon covers as well, with almost no room for movement, which is impossible anyway given the amount of bellows compression with the shorter focal length. I don't own a 240, but it would be a great focal length for 4x5, 5x7 or WP.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,789

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    Another thing to consider about film is that you will have to cut to get the full range of available emulsions; not all are made in prepackaged WP formats. So if you're going to cut, you might as well cut or mask after developing rather than before! If you cut before, you're throwing away film and image area, not to mention cutting in the dark versus cutting in the light.

    Cutting 1.5 inches off both sides of 8x10 film wastes 24.75 square inches of film every shot (10x1.5 + 6.5x1.5). If you can find the film you want in 7x17, you can cut 1/2" of the long side and the remainder in half with no waste, and you've lost 8.5 square inches.

    But the cheapest route is undoubtedly an 8x10 and a pair of scissors.

    Cheers, Steve

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,789

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    Will,

    Here are a couple of examples of images shot on 8x10, printed to a full 6.5x8.5, matted and framed in a standard 11x14 frame. These are not great images, but they do show the results. One of the things I like about the WP format is that it looks wonderful in a standard 11x14 frame with a 8x10 mat.

    Cheers, Steve
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails WP-1.jpg   WP-2.jpg  

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    720

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    I bought a WP camera a while back and it came with 5 holders. I was able to get Keith Canham to make me an adapter for my 8x10 so I can use longer lenses that won't work with the actual WP camera body. I do also have some of the Chamonix holders that I have used with a Kodak WP camera.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Robin Hoods Bay / Yorkshire Dales
    Posts
    146

    Re: Whole Plate film holders: expensive, nonstandard, and...available?

    I am in uk & have a spare Kodak wp back and some holders which are sat in a cupboard gathering dust at the moment. Not sure what they are worth but pm if interested.

Similar Threads

  1. Why are 8x10 and up film holders so expensive?
    By Pawlowski6132 in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 18-Oct-2012, 12:14
  2. 8x10 plate camera film/plate holders
    By David Brunell in forum Gear
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 6-Apr-2012, 08:22

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •