Stephen Johnson's 'The Parks Project' - Is this a glimpse of the future for LF?

[Peter Brown]

Hi all,

I just had a look at Stephen Johnson's site about his project to digitally photograph the US national parks - 'With a New Eye'. What makes this unique is that he is using 4x5 digital backs to do this! He is using a Sinar-X 4x5 view camera, with Dicomed 4x5 and Better Light digital inserts, and the Apple Macintosh PowerBook 540c, 3400c, and G3 series computers, items usually associated with taking still-life studio images.

This setup allows the taking of images in color, black and white, and infrared with extremely high resolution and dynamic range (Dicomed: 6000x7520 pixels, 130MB files with more than 9 stops of exposure latitude and the Better Light: 6000x8000 pixels, 142MB files with more than 10 stops of exposure latitude.)

Obviously the examples on the web site do not show the quality of his images very well, although they look impressive, and I'm wondering if anyone has seen the originals and cares to comment on them. I'm also wondering what you all think of this concept and whether this is what the future holds for LF photography, albeit in a more compact and easier to handle setup.

I realise that carrying all this gear into the wilderness to take images seems like a lot of effort, but maybe this is how the photographers of the past felt like when lugging their heavy 8x10 (and larger) cameras, tripods and plates around (I'm sure I once saw an image of one famous photog & his mule carrying a lot of gear).

On another 'pro' photography list I subscribe to, many of the commercial photographers have commented of late about the demise of a number of E6 processing labs and how the push for digital is quickly overtaking the demand for film. Some of the recent threads here too have noted the discontinuation of some LF size films. I think Stephen Johnson's project is a glimpse into the future of LF photography (or is it already here) and I would be interested to hear others' comments.

You can visit his 'parks project' web site at:

http://www.sjphoto.com/parks_project_photos.html

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

Kind regards

Peter Brown

-----------------------------------------------

Festina lente - hurry slowly

- Latin proverb

[Matt_1193]

I am not impressed.

[Glenn Kroeger]

I think it is the future in a land where everyone has $25K to spare and the wind never blows.

[jnorman]

back in the 19th century, when people like carleton watkins carried mammoth plate view cameras, chemicals and fragile glass plates miles into the wilderness on the backs of mules, it was because that was the only way to get outstanding high-quality large images. carrying a crap-load of digital gear and computers somewhere just to get an image that might be 1/10 the quality of a good silver-based negative seems pretty ridiculous to me, and sounds more like he is counting on the idea that it is "digital" to have some impact on the general public. which, from my experience, is probably not that far off the mark...viewing photographs in a book or magazines, or especially on a website, does not even begin to display the strengths of LF photography, and lay-persons can easily be fooled by the apparent "quality" of a 60-130MB digital file in those applications.

that said, it really doesnt matter that much what format or methodology someone may choose - either you have some kind of vision or you dont, and whatever medium you might choose to express it, it will show one way or the other.

[Joe Johnson]

I don't think the issue is whether this is the fate/future of Large Format so much as a glimpse of the future of FILM. No doubt, digital will eventually replace film, and that's true for LF as well as any other. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Our environment could do without all the chemical waste needed for film production and processing. At least for LF, all our equipment won't be obsolete; we'll just use a different back. Equally certain, however, is that accessible & practical LF digital is a long way off still. jj

[pat krentz]

Just got done looking at his website, while I see nothing unique about his vision or composition, those little 4"x4" imgages on my monitor look pretty good, but what do they look like at 11x14, 16x20 or 20x24 and larger? Like one of the posters said, if it is not better, what is all the hoopla about. Pat

[Peter Brown]

Thanks Joe, you may be on to something - perhaps the question should be re-phrased:

Is this a glimpse of the future for LF "FILM" or the way in which we will record our images?

Although I disagree with your thoughts that; "accessible & practical LF digital is a long way off still." Having been amazed at the speed at which digital technology has developed, especially in the last few years, and with the advances in nano-technology I'd be more inclinded to think that accessible & practical LF digital may not be as far off as we think.

Kind regards

Peter Brown

-- Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.

[Bill Glickman]

I agree with Glen. Although these scanning backs can record with equal detail as film, the subject matter is very limited as exposure times are in the 30 minute range... Most of us landscape shooters struggle with the difference between 1/60th vs. 1/2 second.... so as digital does have a ton of advantages, I feel the makers of these products will not be rushing to make a high end 4x5 backs that will shoot images in 1/60th of second. Therefore, I think film will be around for quite awhile. The big market is studio shooters where most subjects remain still. Kodaks back does shoot at rather fast speeds but can't match 8x10 film for large prints..but falls between MF and 4x5. Whether this trend continues remains to be seen as the market starts shrinking real fast.... i.e. for users who requie superb LF detail and fast shutter speeds.

[Peter Brown]

Pat and others,

I didn't mean to encourage comments on the man's actual photography ability or technique and I think that whether we like his photographs or whether the quality (at this early stage) is better than a traditonal LF hand-made print is irrelevant.

The fact that this photographer has taken the step to transport what is essentially a still-life digital studio camera setup, out into wilderness to see how it performs, is pushing the boundaries of technology and it is these "pioneers" who set the stage for the future.

I agree that currently, film is still the best medium to produce a high quality enlarged image of a wilderness area, but I am also open-minded enough to acknowledge that this gentleman is trying a new approach and I for one would not be surprised to see, as Joe says, digital eventually replacing film.

Let me ask this question;

If the price becomes comparable (or cheaper), the quality and the means by which we can capture an image digitally, becomes as easy and as good as LF film capture, would there be any reason NOT to move to digital capture instead of film?

-- "There is nothing permanent except change."

Kind regards

Peter Brown

[Bill Glickman]

Peter, once digital exceeds film in every way, image resolution, color fidelity, exposure times, size and bulk.... then I think it boils down to economics. For landscape shooters that use a one box of film per year, it still would not make economic sense. But for regular shooters, the cost of this digital system will be dwarfed by the expense of buying film, processing film, scanning film (assuming you are printing digital). In addtion, digital offers many other advantages, such as the ability to see the actual shot on screen before leaving the area and gauranteeing there will be no lost images in the processing stage. Of course both are equally vulnerable to actually loosing the film or hard drive. So if and when digital ever acheives this stage of developement, I am sure it will grab a big market share and leave film makers in a quandry about which films to still produce.

The only question that remains is how many years away is this? My guess is around 5. It could happen faster, but it seems most of the chip makers are putting their recources in the larger markets such as 35mm and MF systems. But like any other industry, once this becomes saturated, makers look for new markets. Landscape LF shooter will surely be last on their target list.