Large Format Landscapes

[AndrewBurns]

Some 4x5 shots on Portra 400 that I ended up cropping square, my chemistry is exhausted so they came out a little grainy and I'm not sure about the compositions but I really enjoyed getting out for the first time in weeks and taking them.

[Alan Klein]

Alan, technically they look fine, with nice textures and cloud detail in the sky, so your metering was accurate (as was development, but I think you sent these out for processing). In the third image, the barn is leaning very slightly to the right, I suspect that you swung the back to get the fence in focus front to back, and that caused a very slight deviation from vertical in the barn. I like the middle image best of the three since I think it has the most interesting point-of-view. The two pictures of the barn are essentially documentation shots, and I realize your objective was getting used to using your new view camera; I suspect that there were more interesting images in the textures of the wood on the building and the fence; in another thread on Fred Picker, those of us who took his workshops around 30 years ago reminisced about how he told us that after we had composed what we thought was our image, pick up the camera and move forward!

Thanks Pete for working me originally to get me started. Yes Picker is right. I heard it: when you think you're too close, get closer. Maybe I still think in terms of color. But it's a great suggestion.

The barn is actually tilted. If you look at the other barn shot with the light sky, you see it's tilted also, especially the left side of the barn. My notes don't indicate I swung either standard, They say I used asymmetrical back tilts for both shots. So could the fact I used the back tilt have accentuated the tilt and shape of the barn? On the second barn shot with the clear sky, I raised the front standard to put the asymmetric line on the trees. Once focused, I dropped it back down again and tilted the back standard to get the water pump in focus.

I'm playing around with using asymmetric tilts or using the old fashion way of iteration with the front standard. I'm not settled which way to go. It's all new to me so I'm trying different things to learn.

[scheinfluger_77]

Any time you make adjustments with the back standard, you will effect the shape of the image on the ground glass, and thus the film. The effect might be subtle or exaggerated, but it does occur.

[Alan Klein]

Any time you make adjustments with the back standard, you will effect the shape of the image on the ground glass, and thus the film. The effect might be subtle or exaggerated, but it does occur.

So I should NOT use asymmetric tilts when shooting anything that has a building in it since the Chamonix uses the back standard. I should use the traditional method of using the front standard for tilts and ignore asymmetric tilts?

[Peter Lewin]

So I should NOT use asymmetric tilts when shooting anything that has a building in it since the Chamonix uses the back standard. I should use the traditional method of using the front standard for tilts and ignore asymmetric tilts?

There are no rules. Your ground glass has a grid. Just use the vertical and horizontal lines to get the image the way you want it to look. I was being extremely pedantic with my comment about the slightly tilted appearance of the barn only because I know that you are experimenting with view camera movements. And if the barn was actually off-vertical, then my comment is totally useless! I can't find it right now, but Austin Granger has a photo somewhere of a barn that is exceedingly tilted by the prevailing winds, it has nothing to do with the photographer or camera! But seriously, try not to think in terms of rules or the technicalities of your swings and tilts (i.e. try to ignore your engineering background!), use the ground glass as your guide.

[alfredian]

I love old barns - both Maryland, where I now reside, and Western Upstate New York, where I grew up are full of them. One visually interesting aspect of these old-old buildings is the likelihood that at least one, of not all, of the once "vertical" members are now not-so-vertical. Some of these old gems begin to go "parallelogram" and finally turn into jumbles of weather beaten slats under one snow-load too many. Utility poles are another "vertical" that maybe isn't.- alfredian

[Mael]

Bagnac Castle, France.

Speed Graphic, FP4+, 90mm Optar

[AndrewBurns]

Two shots on Provia 100 4x5 slide film.

[Meekyman]

Suilven Sunrise, Scottish Highlands.

Taken late October 2016 along the road to Clachtoll, near Lochinver in the Scottish Highlands. We had arrived at Clachtoll intending to head to the beach, but it was insanely windy. So, with time before sunrise fast disappearing we traced our steps back and came across a viewpoint. Hell, the photo was taken 10 metres from the car! Doesn't always have to be a hard slog to be so gloriously rewarded! Technically flawed with flare and too strong a sun (if only couldhave been 15 minutes earlier) but I like the feelings it evokes in me.

Chamonix 045N-2, Rodenstock 135mm f5.6@f16 and 2/3, 1/2s, Kodak Portra 160@ISO 100, no filters. Epson V700 scan, lightroom and colorperfect processing.

Suilven sunrise by Graham Meek, on Flickr

[Corran]

Honeysuckle and Covered Bridge - Forsyth, GA
Intrepid 4x5, Nikkor 90mm f/8, TMX, Rodinal 1:50, N+2 development



Found a little county park with a covered bridge, (re)built in 1901 and repaired in in 90s. The water was very calm, giving a nice reflection, and these honeysuckles seemed like a nice foreground. Heavily pushed the development to increase the contrast as it was getting late and there was little light left. I also took a color image, so it will be interesting to see if the white and yellow of the honeysuckle come through well.