I agree with almost all that has been written.
One thing I would add is that for my portraiture work a big part of the appeal of using LF is the effect is has on the subject before I trip the shutter. I can get an extra layer of "formality" as soon the camera is unfolded. I can't achieve the same theater with an iPhone.
I prefer theatres!
Steve.
Paint and canvas is expensive. Why would anyone paint when they could just take a picture?
I just bought a 4x5 last week and so far I've shot one sheet. I think what brought me to this point (digital>35mm>120>4x5) was a desire for an even more involving process. I've found that I truly prefer working harder for pictures, it makes me appreciate them more and put more thought into the initial process of taking the picture. I was also interested in using movements and wet printing sheet film. I'll still shoot 120 but LF is my focus going forward.
You are fortunate to have groups of students who want to learn.
The student of photography should understand the history, processes and limitations that the photographers who came before them had to deal with, so they can understand better where they are going. The unique opportunity today is that all of the material needed to experience the traditional art of photography is readily available.
I talked with a camera store owner who said the parents were up in arms about a local school making the kids invest 400 dollars in film camera and supplies for a required first year intro to photography course, part of a digital photography curriculum. The parents say the kids will never shoot film. They got the school to change it to an elective, with predictable impact on sales.
My self I compare 35mm to the best of digital. Back the early 60's kodak had film for 35 to compare to the old LF film. This why the LF press camera died the new papers could use a roll of film over sheet. Today they use the digital work great for print.
But for great photos still the find detail the good LF is still king. Most never use a magnifier on an LF, but you can and see the detail. On digital you will see dots.
Also if you working high end the LF is great for sale, and one can do digital even some one with a camera phones.
Dave
Group on 9A/9N South Bend Lathe
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/southbendlathe9
I would agree with many of the comments above in that I just enjoy the routine in the field. I love to set up the camera, take my time, contemplate the scene, linger over the ground glass and I enjoy the manual processes of metering and the shutter. There is no processor to do any of the work, except the one between my ears.
I print digitally and I cannot say that I enjoy the scanning, the color corrections and the dust spotting. From the point after the shutter click, I would prefer digital. The files are very easy and quick to process. If I could afford a digital back, I would go that route in an instant. But I can't afford it. So I mostly shoot 4x5 film and occasionally shoot digital (the latter usually when hiking distances for the light weight or in rapidly changing light where speed is critical).
Bookmarks