If I want a bigger print, I want a bigger negative (contact printing alt processes with in-camera negatives).
If I want a bigger print, I want a bigger negative (contact printing alt processes with in-camera negatives).
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
For my portraiture it changes the experience for the sitter. Although hard to articulate for each sitter what that difference is, there is no doubt sitting in front of a 20 x 24 changes them. There is a radiance in their comportment that the best I can describe is participatory. Something isn't taken from them, they are a part of it, and it is loved. Having shot many many sitters with all of my formats 8 x 10, 10 x 12, and the aforementioned 20 x 24 that radiance changes exponentially as the bigger formats come out. It is fun to witness and be a part of as the photographer.
As for other photographic disciplines I can't believe no one has mentioned contact prints yet!!!
Monty
This one ought to do the trick on 16x20 with some movements to boot:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ILEX-5-shutter
I am still exploring the idea of 16x20 after seeing Hugo Zhang of Chamonix use his in Death Valley with a number of good lens choices like a Nikkor 450, 24' Red Dot and Nikkor Apo 760. But it would be for contact prints as the main consideration, not the ground glass, not the "Wow, look at that camera" factor.
But...every time I make a nice 16x20 from a dynamic 4x5 image that I had only a few moments to make, the idea of going ULF gets pushed back a bit.
The impact of the image, not what format it was printed from, is my sole concern and main reason why I find medium format to be by far my most powerful image making tool.
Because we can and soon won't be, unless we start learning from Denise Ross.
Film is Dead. Long Live Film!
Magic
Tin Can
Because with wetplate collodion, your different sized plates are made in camera. You want a big 10x12 or 16x20 Ambrotype? Get a big camera.
Garrett
flickr galleries
!
I have high hopes and expectation that there will be some form or another of film for a while yet. Even LF and ULF from Ilford, bless 'em.
But, I do know that the old colorblind and ortho emulsions, dense and creamy, are long gone accept for DIY, and that's what I want to photograph with.
Thankfully, people are coming around and starting to recognize that wet plate, as lovely as it is, isn't the only game. More people learning and preserving a legacy is a very good thing.
Denise Ross
www.thelightfarm.com
Dedicated to the Craft of Handmade Silver Gelatin Paper, Dry Plates, and Film
There are old lenses that cover ULF just fine and produce a beautiful image on the film. I bought an old tessar that covers 14x17 for $100. Pinhole and meniscus are options too.
In theory, I could shoot a portrait or woods scene with my DSLR, make a digital negative and make a big alt process or silver contact print. It's not cheating, it's just a different style.
I look at old photos and appreciate the style and craft and don't want to simulate them, I want to make them.
It's not a replacement for 4x5 or 8x10; I consider 4x5 the most useful versatile format of the bunch. I shoot a lot of medium format using one camera and one lens, and the limitations prove productive. ULF limitations are real too, and it makes you think about making the best you can within those limitations.
Bookmarks