Grafmatic : Pros and Cons?

[EdSawyer]

For cleaning, there's 6 or 8 screws that come out - all very easy. Then the whole body slides out of the shell. That allows cleaning the light trap and other internal parts, and retensioning the springs if needed (rare). For lubrication, I sometimes use some 3-in-1 oil on the internal sliding surfaces between the cartridge and the shell. Icewax is another decent choice. Graphite would probably be best but it tends to be dusty and migrates. WD40 is not a lubricant really, so I'd avoid that. One could also likely use a paraffin-based wax or something similar but again I'd be worried about migration of that.

[agregov]

Thanks for the tips on cleaning. For now I think I'll focus on using a simple damp cloth and remove the screws to get to the innards to wipe everything down. I've had several jams where for whatever reason the septums didn't advance/retreat correctly. The holder would basically get stuck in the "out" position. Really awkward to deal with in the field and trying to save previously exposed images.

Aside for 2-3 jams, I've liked using Grafmatics a lot over the past 10 months. I initially started using them with a Chamonix Saber but since moved to using them with an Arca field. I usually travel with both cameras allowing handheld and multi-lens, tripod mounted 4x5 shooting. Having film magazines for b&w and color film moving between two camera systems has been really great. If there's one pet peeve I've had with Grafmatics is you don't get a clean full border around the 4x5 neg. It's a bit of a dirty border. Also, the imprint of the image counter on the neg sometimes gets in the way of some images with tight framing. But for the most part, it hasn't been a big issue. The only other issue for me were scratches on the neg. I mostly got rid of scratches by being very cautious loading and unloading the septums in a changing tent.

One last note, with a class some years ago we visited Bruce Barnbaum's studio in WA state and he very enthusiastically uses Grafmatics. He picks up extras whenever he can to keep a good working set. Given the age of these things, it probably takes awhile to accumulate a good working batch.

[mdarnton]

I'm tempted just to make an offer to buy ones that don't work for pennies on the dollar, however. . . . . my experience so far is that when they jam with the box out cycling film to the back, the problem is weak springs. You can see the offenders, two long leaf springs on each side under the edge on the long side when the box is out. Make them push harder and that fixes cycling problems.

I use Renaissance wax as a lubricant on film holder and Grafmatics. It goes on extremely thin and makes parts slippery. Great for the slides in film holders.

[EdSawyer]

I use mine with a Chamonix Saber also - it's a great combination, easily the lightest/most compact 4x5 around, I think (when folded up). THe only other maintenance thing to be aware of is sometimes the felt light trap needs to be re-glued. It's easy once it's apart.

Good tip re: the Renaissance wax.

You can easily remove the counter wheel, I did on all of mine, as it was annoying and added nothing in terms of function for me. It's a reversible mod, so no downside really.

It's not too hard to find decent ones for sale, just plan on disassembling and cleaning any you get and as long as septums are straight, the rest is pretty easy to overhaul. Going rate seems to be $50-100 for a good one.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I don't know if someone's mentioned it, but there was at one time a test of various filmholders in either Popular Photography or Modern Photography that showed that Grafmatics had better film flatness than standard filmholders, so that's an argument in their favor, even given the option of traditional filmholders.

[David Lindquist]

I don't know if someone's mentioned it, but there was at one time a test of various filmholders in either Popular Photography or Modern Photography that showed that Grafmatics had better film flatness than standard filmholders, so that's an argument in their favor, even given the option of traditional filmholders.

Do you think it might have been in View Camera magazine? That's my vague recollection (with an emphasis on vague).
David

[David A. Goldfarb]

Do you think it might have been in View Camera magazine? That's my vague recollection (with an emphasis on vague).
David

VC may have repeated the information, but that kind of bench testing was more characteristic of the earlier publications, well before VC began publication.

[EdSawyer]

It was in Camera and Darkroom, arguably the best photo magazine of it's day (Modern Photo was probably the best in it's day, but they didn't overlap much, if at all...)

Grafmatics were the best as far as film flatness.

It's covered here: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/holders.html

[Mark Sampson]

I believe that article was published in 'View Camera' in 1995 or so. I recall reading it there, and never looked at 'Camera and Darkroom' much at all. I expect the leaf springs in the Grafmatic help hold the septum in exactly the right spot. I can't say that my Grafmatic negs were noticeably any sharper than my negs made in regular holders, though.

[VictoriaPerelet]

Pros:
1. Working with people - one holder per pose. Takes about 1sec per exposure. I usually preload about 6-8 grafmatics before session. When last one is used - time for break.
2. One grafmatic - one Jobo reel, 6sheets. I use 4x5 reels and various jobo tanks/extensions.
3. They have Number imprints!

Cons:
1. They jam
2. No EXIF exposure data or GPS imprints




I never hand hold camera. Use Foba stand in studio.