8X10 Holder Weight and Why 8X10 is called 8X10???

[audioexcels]

1) What is the lightest weight wood based holder and what is the weight of the modern plastic types? (film only of course)


2) Why is the 8X10 or any format called 8X10 when the film exposed is only 7 5/8" X 9 5/8"?


3) Why make a GG that is 8X10 when the film area is almost 1/2 an inch off of the 8X10 size? Why isn't the GG made to be 7 5/8" by 9 5/8"?



As a side note, what are the lightest lenses that cover the format and produce excellent results with good enough movements?


Thanks all!

[John Kasaian]

1. Darn if I don't have a scale handy. My wooden holders marked Graflex made for Eastman Kodak are quite bit lighter than my plastic Lisco Regals and Regal 2 holders. Lots lighter.

2. Something has to fit into the grooves in the film holder to keep the film flat and from falling out into the bellows.

3. Depends on the camera, I'd say. The gg on my 'dorff looks to be true to whats on the film.

side note) "good enough movements" is a subjective term---some subjects require a lens with whole lot of movement to be "good enough" while other subjects require hardly any, if at all to be "good enough."

240mm, 270mm & 305mm G- Clarons are nice lightwieght lenses with quite a bit of wiggle room when stopped down. Aluminium barrel Artars are extremely light if you can work without a shutter and a 16-1/2" or 19" have generous image circles.

I hope this helps.

[audioexcels]

1. Darn if I don't have a scale handy. My wooden holders marked Graflex made for Eastman Kodak are quite bit lighter than my plastic Lisco Regals and Regal 2 holders. Lots lighter.

2. Something has to fit into the grooves in the film holder to keep the film flat and from falling out into the bellows.

3. Depends on the camera, I'd say. The gg on my 'dorff looks to be true to whats on the film.

I have had everything below 8X10 and the GG measures exactly that size of what should be the exposed area on the frame (or what we view through the glass)...though, the GG is in fact larger. With the smaller sizes, it seems they have a much closer look to the GG than the larger sizes (at least with WP and what I know gets exposed with an 8X10).

Definitely agree with you on the film grooves part, but why not make the holders larger so that the film is say, 8.5X10.5 and slotted in for a true 8X10 image?

If you can find that scale in the attic somewhere, I'd love to know the weight difference

From what I recall, a modern 8X10 holder is something like 1.5lbs. I could live with an 8X10 holder that was something like .75lbs

Cheers and thanks!

[ic-racer]

3. Depends on the camera, I'd say. The gg on my 'dorff looks to be true to whats on the film.

Similar findings with the Century. The vertical view is almost identical to the exposed film's height and the horizontal view is perhaps 1/16" wider on each side. Seems pretty darn good for a 100yr old camera and a contemporary film holder.

[Turner Reich]

Why is a 2x4 called a 2x4? It once was 2x4 and not 1 1/2 x 3 1/2.

[audioexcels]

Why is a 2x4 called a 2x4? It once was 2x4 and not 1 1/2 x 3 1/2.

I was just thinking that the entire area of a glass plate can be the same size as what will be exposed, so maybe that's where it began.

[Clay Turtle]

Why is a 2x4 called a 2x4? It once was 2x4 and not 1 1/2 x 3 1/2.

I believe the rough cut lumber is 2x4 but in the process of cut & dry, the smooth finish is reduced to the standard size.

[Nick_3536]

450C Fuji. Lots of movements. Light.

[John Kasaian]

I took one of my wood holders into the kitchen.
Loaded with film, it is ever so slightly heavier in my guesstimation than a can of Dole Pineaple Chunks in Juice---8 0z (227g) net wieght is what it says on the can.

I hope this helps

Maybe its time for a snack??? 13 grams of sugar----dare I???

[audioexcels]

I took one of my wood holders into the kitchen.
Loaded with film, it is ever so slightly heavier in my guesstimation than a can of Dole Pineaple Chunks in Juice---8 0z (227g) net wieght is what it says on the can.

I hope this helps

Maybe its time for a snack??? 13 grams of sugar----dare I???

LOLOLOL

That's "very light" IMHO. 1/2 a pound!!!

One more for you after your snack. Can you find a jar of uhhhh...something else and compare that to the modern holders?

Out of curiousity, if you were to take a guess, how much heavier is the modern type holder? Twice as heavy orrrr...more than twice?...orrrr...a little less than twice as heavy???....hehehe.

Thanks and enjoy your snack and I hope you'll be back!