I don't see 8x10 b&w film being unavailable in my life time. But, it is expensive. I rarely shoot film in mine, mostly shoot wet plate. I shoot a lot more film in my 4x5 Chamonix.
Kent in SD.
I don't see 8x10 b&w film being unavailable in my life time. But, it is expensive. I rarely shoot film in mine, mostly shoot wet plate. I shoot a lot more film in my 4x5 Chamonix.
Kent in SD.
In contento ed allegria
Notte e di vogliam passar!
Here is a log, dead, on 5.5x14 format...
(but 8x10 is pretty cool!)
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
That's ordinary 8x10 film after being put on a film stretcher, Vaughn. Just like the log stretcher we once used in the lumberyard. Pulled far enough, you'd end up with a toothpick diameter tree across Sacramento River, requiring 3mm X 5.5 foot-wide film to photograph. This kind of thing will become more common once Kodak starts coating film on recycled Saran Wrap.
Like the original poster, I have taken the plunge recently. Living in my own little corner of medium format digital (with technical camera), I had no idea about the recent bit of a boom of interest in large format photography, perhaps propelled by cheaper options like Intrepid etc. and to some degree by Youtubers making videos about "large format". In the long run I feel like even if this curiosity about large format is short lived, some new comers will stick around for the long haul and help the demand for film. I am not too worried about film availability, although the options are somewhat limited for 8x10 but hey I am not complaining.
Long ago (pre-digital) LF was for people who wanted the creative options and some better quality than the wearable camera options. Creative fine art & architecture photographers and pros shooting magazine covers and centerfolds, etc...
When digital SLRs came along as a professional option (let say 2005 onwards) until a couple years ago, photographers would retire, die, or move to digital and their old film gear was simply surplus without a big market. Aside from some cult LF lenses, prices were pretty modest. Not lawnsale prices, but supply exceeded demand. I count myself in taking up LF during this time because I could get for cheap what I couldn't afford growing up and get online support and challenges here. I've been able to use the equipment my photo heros used from the pictorialist and modern styles.
In the past couple of years. the online explosion of learning with quality youtube content, people getting tired of digital, general analog/handmade revival, interest in alt process, etc... New camera options like Intrepid help too. As color photography has entered photo/art history education, I think LF with color film has become something attractive and appreciated among photographer with a formal photography education.
Long ago LF was most often for working photographers trying to make a living with higher quality images. Long ago there was a significant market for high quality and artistic images. Many were driven by the advertising market where creation of images were directly tied to branding identity and more. This was how product was sold and company reputations were created and maintained. This was the market served by LF hardware manufactures along with film and film processing companies. It was a significant industry long ago. Folks who did this work were mostly demanding as their ability to put food on the table, roof over their head and studio and basic survival placed specific requirements on the "gear" and related they used to achieve this.
~Or why the repeating note about modern lenses from any of the big four ( Nikon, Rodenstock, Schneider, Fujinon) being GOOD. There were few if any exception unless the lens was defective or damaged during the len's lifetime.
~The camera of choice was Sinar and similar monorails as they offered the greatest flexibility, product support and more.
~Powerful strobe lighting (kilowatt/second) was mandatory due to the amount of light required to achieve f22 or smaller apertures for table top and large object photos. Light modifiers placed further demands on strobe power available. On top of all that, good strobe units were reliable-durable as if the strobe unit failed, the $ clock continued to tick with no images demanded by the customer being made. The strobe units had to be light output consistent, color balanced over it's power range and more... or why Bronocolor or Elinchrome or Comet or... were pricy and top quality units.
~Film format of choice was 4x5 for very good reasons, it had the best image quality to cost ratio and allows camera movements. Format size had a ground glass image size large enough to easily work with to place table top compositions and more.. Film was readily available, high quality and highly consistent film processing labs were easily accessible.
~8x10 was the far less often used film format as the cost related to that fit format and all limited where these images were most useful... in that world of commercial image making. Yet, 8x10 and 5x7 film was quite supported by the film brands.
Point of all this being, folks who lived-produced creative works-survived good have either moved on or continued using modern image production methods as demanded by the current image technology... leaving behind the tools they once used. For those who lived during that era, old habits and expectations of image quality and hardware performance tend to carry on.
It does appear lots of once digital or roll film centric image makers have taken an interest in sheet film. Bringing with them the beliefs and habits from their digital and 35mm or 120 roll film habits. Yet sheet film is different in so many ways.
As for the availability of 8x10 and other sheet film in the future, long as there is market interest large enough, it is likely there will be a company to make sheet film. IMO, sheet film will never be what it all once was for a long list of facts and reality of image making today. Yet, it is all these folks who got interested in LF recently that has perked on the availably of all stuff LF related.
Bernice
Originally Posted by jp
Fear not the 8x10.
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
"We have nothing to fear but film itself." FDR
I don't think many photographers 'switch to 8x10' in the sense that they pick up the format and only use that. The fact is 8x10 is so impractical in many ways that it's more of a tool in the tool box of high quality image making. It's good to have an 8x10 camera, but if you do, keep that Mamiya 7, or pick up a 4x5 along with it. There are so many situations where an 8x10 is not the right choice for the job. Conversely, when you do get to use biggie size, the quality is well worth it.
For my part I tend to shoot squares in 120. Then for 45/810 orientation images I have a Chamonix 57N with a reducing back, and a Chamonix 810V. If I had a Mamiya 7 there would be many situations that would cause me to chose it over the 4x5, but not having that choice available to me keeps me shooting sheets. Extensive movements are not important to my work as that's a tabletop necessity.
I love shooting with my 810 camera but color film has gotten completely unaffordable. Luckily there are so many B&W choices now, we're basically spoiled. And I do have some special boxes of 8x10 chrome for when I want to show off.
I heard Sears used to hire 60 photographers with >60 8x10 Deardorff cameras to shoot its catalogues.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks