Urge of ULF Panorama

[Lachlan 717]

Both 7x17” and 8x20” can be easily scanned and stitched on something as simple as an Epsom V700/750/800 etc with high acuity, massive file size results.

Both also allow magnificent contact prints at native size. Or, you could produce high quality, pre-processed digital negatives for larger contact/carbon/alt process contact prints.

If you are going to go with the bigger film size, you probably should factor in the cost of a new iPhone Pro because, like the old saying goes, the best camera is the one that you have with you, and I doubt that, once the dust of the initial purchase of a 12x30” camera settles, it won’t be with you much…

Here’s someone’ struggle with *just* a 12x20”: https://youtu.be/0tlgk6pmXyA

A d 16x20”:

https://youtu.be/78tfSJhoTQA

[Mark NY]

Enlargement is not a goal. Building an enlarger for 12x30 is beyond my wildest dream. Contact print 99% most likely

Consider finishing costs as well - mounting, framing, and the like; can't imagine you're pining for prints this big just to store them rolled up in a tube. You'll also need to rent a Ryder to transport them to the gallery for the show(s) I presume you'll be soliciting?

[Corran]

Yes, I've heard of him. While he and I both make 8 foot murals, he rented a 2,000 square foot room. I'm not so lucky. That's bigger than my entire house!

There are lots of photographers that make enormous murals -- much larger than mine or Clyde's. The size of the print determines the size of the darkroom. My point is that a mural does not require an enormous negative or enlarger -- and can be done without a 2,000 square foot dark room.

As has already been said, contact prints are a perfectly valid and common usage. That's what I'm doing when I shoot larger than 4x5 too, at least for now. And I mention Butcher because enlargements can be done. Of course it takes a large space and lots of work/gear. I think that is obvious.

You seem to be needlessly discouraging, IMO. One thing about ULF from what I've seen is that if you buy the camera used (most common) it's often fairly easy to sell at about the same cost. I currently have folks asking to buy my 12x20. No, I'm not selling, for anyone who may be reading...

[Duolab123]

My friend has a "baby" process camera, 16x20. Vacuum back would require building on a truck bed, including a light tight room for changing film. I parted on a camera that took at least 36x48" film. I gave the 36x48 Kodak ortho copy film to my friend, still sitting in their basement.

I would love a Circut camera 500 fresh rolls of film and a new Porsche, as long as we're dreaming.

[xkaes]

You seem to be needlessly discouraging, IMO.

IMO, asking for clarification of goals, and pointing out potential limitations & pitfalls, is encouragement.

"If I were you, pardner, I'd avoid Donner Pass".

[ic-racer]

I think processing the prints will be harder than processing the film. Large fiber based paper is very difficult to work with. At least the film won't wrinkle or fold on you. My 8x10 enlarger came from a lab doing 50x100" but 16x20" fiber is the biggest I can handle with my own 2 hands.
Washing the prints may be more difficult than washing the film also.

You might consider making some 12x20" prints while waiting for the camera to be built, just to get that part of the process trouble free.

[xkaes]

I think processing the prints will be harder than processing the film.

You're right about that. One more advantage of RC paper -- but you still have to be careful with BIG prints.

[interneg]

As has already been said, contact prints are a perfectly valid and common usage. That's what I'm doing when I shoot larger than 4x5 too, at least for now. And I mention Butcher because enlargements can be done. Of course it takes a large space and lots of work/gear. I think that is obvious.

You seem to be needlessly discouraging, IMO. One thing about ULF from what I've seen is that if you buy the camera used (most common) it's often fairly easy to sell at about the same cost. I currently have folks asking to buy my 12x20. No, I'm not selling, for anyone who may be reading...

The question that always needs to be asked is whether it's about the image that's arrived at (and if the metaphysics of the camera used really matter to that) - or if it's simply about owning the biggest camera.

[Mark Sampson]

Well then, I suppose that Douglas Busch holds the record for contemporary ULF field cameras. As noted in a recent thread on a similar topic, he made a 40"x60" camera in the late '80s He, his camera, and his photographs were featured in "View Camera" magazine in the early "90s. Not sure if he's still working with that monster, though.

[G Benaim]

I’m curious what’s the largest size you’ve worked w so far. If you’ve never developed your own film I’d highly recommend starting w 8x10 before going bigger. I recently added 717 after years of working w 810 and it took me a while to get everything right, I imagine starting at a larger size would be even more difficult and frustrating. Get your skills and procedures dialed in at 810 and then move up.