Removable Backs on 4x5s?

[Dan V]

I hate to show my ignorance, but...

I'm trying to increase my percentage of "keepers" and I'm hell bent on maximizing stability of my 4x5 when setting up to shoot. Learning the hard and expensive way just how many ways I can contribute to the focus being off just enough to irritate.

Whether it's a matter of the camera not being totally tightened up after focusing, or the ever-so-slight breeze caressing the bellows, or adding filters to the lens, or the tripod slowly sinking in the sand or gently trying to shoehorn-in a Polaroid holder to proof the shot, then removing that and slipping in the QL holder, etc, etc, etc.

I deliberately got a low profile ball head for my deliberately center-column-less tripod, thinking this would keep the camera as close as possible to the tripod plate and thereby increase stability.

I'm not ready to forgo my training wheels just yet by giving up the Polaroid 545 holder; but getting that hunk of metal into the camera back is never a delicate operation and I'm sure it destabilizes the camera. I haven't tried other Polaroid holders, so I don't know if they're any better.

Is there a 4x5 camera on the market that features a back that can be gently removed for purposes of loading the film holder after which the sandwiched pair can be remounted onto the camera? Seems to me that this would involve far less applied force than how I'm now having to load film.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Any camera with a reversible back does this easily, but what camera are you using? You should be able to insert a filmholder or Polaroid holder without disturbing the camera. On very light cameras like a Gowland it may take some finesse (like pulling the spring back with one finger and pressing the camera with the thumb), but it's still manageable.

[Oren Grad]

Any camera that has a "reversing back" (as opposed to a "revolving back") has a removable back - one changes the orientation between vertical and horizontal by taking the back off the camera and replacing it the other way. Most 4x5 cameras have reversing backs.

But normally you shouldn't have to do that just to get the holder in without messing up the focus badly. A few questions to help sort this out: What camera are you using? Have you tried using regular cut sheet film holders in the back? Is the spring back very tight? When you say getting the 545 in is never a delicate operation, what specific problems do you have when you're inserting it?

[Oren Grad]

Oops, from the other thread I see it's an Ebony SV45U. That shouldn't be causing you lots of trouble. Again, what specific problems do you have inserting the Polaroid holder?

[Dan V]

Any camera that has a "reversing back" (as opposed to a "revolving back") has a removable back - one changes the orientation between vertical and horizontal by taking the back off the camera and replacing it the other way. Most 4x5 cameras have reversing backs.

But normally you shouldn't have to do that just to get the holder in without messing up the focus badly. A few questions to help sort this out: What camera are you using? Have you tried using regular cut sheet film holders in the back? Is the spring back very tight? When you say getting the 545 in is never a delicate operation, what specific problems do you have when you're inserting it?

The spring back is relatively tight, but I presume it's supposed to be if it's to maintain a light-tight seal. I am able to insert holders, but the Polaroid 545 being that much clunkier than the QL holder takes more force - particularly at the half way point of inserting or removing.

I've always loaded film w/ holder with the back on the camera. Perhaps it would be better to just remove the back, then load the film holder and reattach the back to the camera.

[John Berry]

I only use polaroid to see what the compositions looks like. I NEVER depend on it to check for critical focus. The sloppy fit of the film in the holder is the cause of the shots to be off that little bit that you describe. S%*# can the training wheels and the keepers will grow. Shoot chrome, and get better results at a cheaper price. I say chrome as it will not be subjected to all the variables ( options ) you will have when doing B&W. Exposure tolerance is tighter in chrome, which will pay dividends when you go to B&W later if you choose. Your going to have to do it sooner or later. Get a notebook and keep records of each exposure as a reference when evaluating your shots. When doing film test I put in my Macbeth test card along with exposure info that I put on index cards with a magic marker. I have a full set with a shutter speeds, f-stops to the 1/4, +3 to -3 over and under cards and EV#s. Include the applicable cards and you have metadata in the shot itself.

[John Berry]

I forgot to add that I also insert a card for the film and speed brackets are based on.

[Alan Rabe]

Check with Richard Ritter. He makes a bail that attaches to your back that actually moves the back out very smoothly and effortlessly for film holders or whatever needs to be inserted.

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Dan,

Is there a 4x5 camera on the market that features a back that can be gently removed for purposes of loading the film holder after which the sandwiched pair can be remounted onto the camera? Seems to me that this would involve far less applied force than how I'm now having to load film.

A number of 4x5 cameras (including some of the Calumet and Toyo models) have backs that feature a "bail" that will gently lift the focusing frame to allow the film holder to be inserted with no struggle, which I think would meet your objective.

[Ted Harris]

See Alan's comment above and have a bail made. Also, you aren't alone. I had a partivcipant at a workshop several weeks ago who expressed similar concerns with the same camera .... I think he is having Richard make him a bail.