Shoot 4x10 with an 8x10 camera

[Chauncey Walden]

I made a dedicated box camera for my 121mm Super Angulon with a 3 position lens board so that the lens could be centered for 8x10 or centered on a high or low 4x10 (using a split darkslide). To keep construction simple I just made it to take the back from my 8x10 Century Universal. I made the lens board 3 position so that I would have the option of not having to rotate the back to use the same film position and maybe end up with the film holder opening facing the sun. I now feel that the best place for the portion of the film in use is the top so that the split darkslide is supported for its length and not prone to dangle. The camera box has dual tripod bushings at 90 degrees so verticals can be done using the centering of the lensboard. I didn't make it as a 4x10 because I had all the 8x10 gear and it is easier to make a camera than a back and film holder - plus, I still have the option of shooting it as an ultra wide 8x10.

[Vaughn]

Something to consider.

Are 4x10 holders actually "lighter" than 8x10?. Not really. I get four 4x10 negs from one 8x10 holder. I would have to have two 4x10 holders to get the same number of negs. Do two 4x10 holders actually weigh less than one 8x10 holder -- probably not (4 long sides compared to only two with the single 8x10.

So based on the weight of the holders per 4x10 negative...it is lighter going with the the 8x10 and the modified darkslide.

But of course the 4x10 camera itself is bound to be lighter...but holder weight is significant.

Vaughn

[audioexcels]

Something to consider.

Are 4x10 holders actually "lighter" than 8x10?. Not really. I get four 4x10 negs from one 8x10 holder. I would have to have two 4x10 holders to get the same number of negs. Do two 4x10 holders actually weigh less than one 8x10 holder -- probably not (4 long sides compared to only two with the single 8x10.

So based on the weight of the holders per 4x10 negative...it is lighter going with the the 8x10 and the modified darkslide.

But of course the 4x10 camera itself is bound to be lighter...but holder weight is significant.

Vaughn

True Vaughn. But if you use a reduction back, you achieve greater movements with the 4X10 precisely centered. If you are only shooting 4X10 and doing little/no movements at all, then the full sheet split into two or masking, etc. makes most sense. With weight, maybe two equals one, but also, two 4X10 holders can be easier to transport than the 8" end of the 8X10 holder. Say a person wants to shoot mostly 4X10 for a day, they can leave most 8X10 holders at home and have a potentially much more compact pack.

I think there isn't any right or wrong option, but many different options/approaches to this.

If I was doing this, these are the three things that would determine how I would do it:

1) If most shooting is 4X10, buy a 4X10 cam.

2) If 50 percent is shot 4X10, have a reduction back made.

3) If 10-25 percent is done with 4X10, just use the full sheet for two 4X10's or mask it, etc. techniques to shoot 4X10.

[Nick_3536]

So based on the weight of the holders per 4x10 negative...it is lighter going with the the 8x10 and the modified darkslide.

But of course the 4x10 camera itself is bound to be lighter...but holder weight is significant.

Vaughn

Some of the 4x10 cameras are very close to 8x10 in weight and size.

[Vaughn]

Some of the 4x10 cameras are very close to 8x10 in weight and size.

Yes I suppose a heavy 4x10 would be very close to a light 8x10.

Audio..."Say a person wants to shoot mostly 4X10 for a day, they can leave most 8X10 holders at home and have a potentially much more compact pack."

Actually, per 4x10 negative, 8x10 holders take up less space than 4x10 holders (two 4x10 holders side-by-side are wider than an 8x10 holder (and would not fit in my pack side-by-side -- the 8x10's just fit in.) But I see your point, if one is only taking 2 to 4 holders, 4x10's would be small package, but really, so are 1 or 2 8x10's. But I would have to carry 10 to 14 4x10 holders to take the same number of negs as I can with my 8x10 holders -- and I would not have the opportunity to shoot 8x10 if I see something that would works well in that format. In reality, though, I carry up to 7 8x10 holders, it would be a rare rare day that I would expose 28 4x10 negs in one day -- I have no desire to work that fast!

But like you said, whatever works best for the individual. I just like having the flexibility at the cost of a 2 ounce modified dark slide that takes up almost zero room in my pack. And I am in about that 10% to 25% range of 4x10 to 8x10 usage.

Since I can center the lens in the middle of the 4x10 (at the top or bottom of the 8x10) by using rise/fall, my camera movements are the same as if I was using 8x10 film. The only time this is a hassle is when I am using the 159mm lens -- but that lens tends to be a hassle with my 8x10, too! The 210mm is no problem.

One can always turn a 4x10 camera on its side to do a vertical (one would need front swing to get front tilt), but it is easier to make a vertical 4x10 with an 8x10 since the movements stay the same. (What do you call a 4x10 camera with a reversable back? An 8x10 camera with a 4x10 back.)

In reality, if I could afford to buy a 4x10 camera and a significant number of holders, I'd buy a 7x17 instead!

Vaughn

PS...if I ever get an 11x14 camera, I have an extra metal dark slide and will be also making 5.5x14 images! (same shape as 4x10 and 7x17)

[Mike Castles]

Or you could get a 4x10 back for the 8x10, have seen a couple (Canham comes to mind first). But not sure how much fun it would be to carry both size holders unless working from the car or in a fixed location.

Vaughn, like the idea of the 5.5x14 - like you, always thought if I ever moved to 11x14 I would figure out a way to mask it off for 8.5x14 (which follows the 7x11/12x20 format). Or we could follow Jim and have 5x14 - just not have as nice a camera dedicated for the format.

[Nick_3536]

I already asked Chamnoix if they could make a reducing back and holders for 5.5x14 to fit either an 11x14 or the bigger 12x20 camera -)

[Scott Squires]

I shoot 4x10 and 8x10 with a Canham 8x10 wood field camera using 4x10 and 8x10 backs. I also have a Canham 4x10 camera. I have found that using the 4x10 camera is much lighter and easier to backpack. But I am using the 8x10 camera with both backs far more often because it gives me more options. The 8x10 camera also allows for very easy 4x10 vertical shots!

I shoot about 50/50 4x10 vs 8x10. I use the AWB film holder soft case that holds six 8x10 film holders. I remove two 8x10 film holders and replace them with four 4x10 film holders. This allows four holders for each format to be carried in the field. For me this has been a great setup!

I do my own E-6 and B&W developing with a CPP-2 because it is way cheaper and a very rewarding part of the process.

[audioexcels]

In reality, if I could afford to buy a 4x10 camera and a significant number of holders, I'd buy a 7x17 instead!

Vaughn

PS...if I ever get an 11x14 camera, I have an extra metal dark slide and will be also making 5.5x14 images! (same shape as 4x10 and 7x17)

That's the kind of thinking!

I didn't know 4X10 holders were wider. Wouldn't it depend on the specific 4X10 holder per its width? As an example, I asked about 6X10 holders and a nice person linked to a French site that modded an 8X10 holder to a 4X10 sized one. So this one would have no width variation. But maybe the others out there do as you are saying.

I'm curious more about the vertical alignment of a 4X10 by flipping it around and why this would be a problem vs. an 8X10 using 4X10 back flipped around?

[audioexcels]

I already asked Chamnoix if they could make a reducing back and holders for 5.5x14 to fit either an 11x14 or the bigger 12x20 camera -)

I'm sure they will. It will cost some, but they should accomodate to this no sweat.