I hesitate to ask what to me seems an obvious question: why chose to shoot wet plate rather than sheet film, since Chamonix cameras can do both? Logistically and ecologically it would have been easier, although perhaps I can answer my own question with another question, "why do some make a point of climbing Mt. Everest (Chomolungma) without using oxygen, although the alternative would be easier?"
Switching subjects, a book I have which combines Tibet and large format is "Whispered Prayers, Portraits and Prose of Tibetans in Exile," by Stephen R. Harrison. Not mountain photography, but sharing the subject of Tibet, and in Harrison's case, all photographs taken with a 7x17 Canham.
I'd surmise that wet plate was the chosen medium, and the whole point all along. Why would someone bring larger more tedious equipment to begin with for sake of contact prints when there are much more petite alternatives - cause they want to! No other rationale needed. Why did I backpack in the mountains with heavy large format gear for forty years - cause it wouldn't have been the same if I didn't. I doubt anyone engages in this forum if they aren't some kind of logistical fool.
Bookmarks