Shooting 8x20

[Andrew Plume]

Blind Pig

Juergen has come in and further emphasised what's already been said - while there's an awful lot of quality info on this site there are, as you'll have realised enough people on here who are happy to stand up and attempt to guide those who need it etc etc

an 8x20 camera is going to be enormous in size compared to a 4x5 - if you didn't want to look for a 4x10, there's no reason why you cannot use a 8x10 and just mask off part of the ground glass etc and i've just checked Badger Graphics web site for the current price for what is probably the cheapest new 4x10 and that comes in at US$1,900 and that's ex holders and shipping - there's also another point used 4x10's don't shown up very regularly either on here or on the big auction site

regards

andrew

[Kimberly Anderson]

I have shot 8x20 and have put it on hold for a while in favor of 4x10. My reasons are numerous, and many have already been shared. My 4x10 kit is quite nice and fairly extensive and I have about 7K into it already.

Some things that haven't really been mentioned:

I can backpack my 4x10.
I can travel overseas with my 4x10.
I can scan my 4x10's.
I can purchase many inexpensive lenses that cover 4x10.
Film is still relatively easy to find and not need a special order.
Film is still relatively inexpensive to purchase.
I can double-down on my 8x10 film and cut it in half and have 2 sheets of 4x10.
Holders are relatively easy to purchase.
Paper and chemicals to print on are more affordable (especially when printing on arches platine and using pt/pd to print with).
People can afford to purchase said prints.
I can also enlarge 4x10 (which is pretty fun).
Mistakes are less costly.
Dust is easier to control.
Storage space for film in the freezer is smaller.
My camera of choice can shoot four formats instead of just one (8x10, 4x10 4x5 and 5x7).
I can process 5 sheets at a time instead of just one.
Storing 4x10 negatives is much easier.
4x10 is easier to shoot in the wind.

Good luck! Sometimes with this large format stuff you have to trod down the path you are passionate about and ignore the advice of others.

I did a little of that myself and have come back to the 4x10 format.

[Michael Roberts]

Depends on your expectations. If you want a real 8x20 camera, it's going to blow your budget. But if you can cobble something together, you can easily shoot 8x20 color slide film within your budget. Here's how:

First, make your own camera, either from scratch or cobble together something from parts. John Jarosz on this forum built his 8x20 from two junker Kodak 2-D 8x10s.
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...300#post732300

See post #291.

You can make your own camera from scratch for $100-200.

Second, make your own 8x20 film holders.

Third, shoot two 8x10 color slide sheets of film end to end to make 8x20. Put the notches on the ends. You may have to do a little editing to remove evidence of the inside edge.

Fourth, you'll need a lens. You can pick up a Nikkor 480 or 610mm process lens in a barrel for $95-115.


You've got youth on your side; where there's a will, there's a way.

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...hlight=diy+ulf

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...y+film+holders

ps. I'm still working on my 7x11 film holders. I think I finally have the dark slide baffle problem licked. I've finished two prototypes and I'm assembling 8 more holders now.

The real expense will be the film and processing. You can save a bundle by starting with expired film and doing your own processing.

Also, keep in mind that you likely will not be making a lot of photographs. This is completely unlike digital in that regard. William Corey--who shot 8x20 color slides--said "planning to make a photograph is like planning a crime." He would often spend days studying the location he wanted to photograph, making sketches, and then choosing the right time of day to make one 8x20 color photograph.
http://www.mamutphoto.com/content/view/140/29/lang,en/

http://www.williamcorey.com/index.html

If you do want to save up, then plan on paying $1,000-2,000 for an old banquet camera in fair to poor condition that may need a new bellows ($400+) and about $400 each for S&S film holders.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I'm going to have to agree with Michael on this on. " where there is a will there is a way" You have youth on your side. I built 3 ULF cameras. 8x20, 11x14 and 14x17. Now my first the 8x20 took 18 months as I built when I was inspired to do so. I built everything except the bellows and they cost me 450.00. The expensive part is film and holders and I'm talking about B&W film only. Color I feel is out of the question. I use a 15" Ilex process lens and a 21 1/4 Kodak Anastigmat that I found for very, very cheap. Forget a shutter because you will not need one,IMO.
So build one and you can do it within budget. There are many posts and resources on line but YOU have to do the research. Find a Kodak 2-D beater and use the parts or find something to use as a plan and get to work.
8x20 B&W is just fine. Take a look.

[Jeff Bannow]

Not sure - could he shoot x-ray film? Does it come in that size?

[Peter Gomena]

If you want to experiment with an ultra-large format on a tight budget, build yourself a big pinhole camera. You don't an expensive, hard-to-find lens or a film holder. A contact print from a big pinhole negative can be amazingly detailed. You should be able to build a dandy for less than $100. This will acquaint you with all the pleasures, pains and pitfalls of ULF without busting your wallet.

Peter Gomena

[imagedowser]

I've not seen any 8x20 x-ray film...Anyone know of some? Pin hole camera sounds like a very good way to start.... 4x10 also, to get the feel of the format, half size.

[aluncrockford]

Can I direct you to Michael A Smiths web site, all his work is shot on 8x20 and it is utterly sublime I have just attended his Paris workshop and seeing his prints was a revelation, if you can sign up to his next workshop, spending some time with Paula and Michael will set you in the right direction for the rest of your photographic life


http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/index_skip.html

[612tom]

I can backpack my 4x10.
I can travel overseas with my 4x10.
I can scan my 4x10's.
I can purchase many inexpensive lenses that cover 4x10.
Film is still relatively easy to find and not need a special order.
Film is still relatively inexpensive to purchase.
I can double-down on my 8x10 film and cut it in half and have 2 sheets of 4x10.
Holders are relatively easy to purchase.
Storage space for film in the freezer is smaller.
4x10 is easier to shoot in the wind.

I was planning 7x17 or 8x20 but went for 4x10 for many of Michael's reasons above.

Being able to travel easily is a key for me, plus being able to shoot colour when the time is right, which is a no-no in 8x20 unless you want to stitch digitally.

[Lachlan 717]

I was planning 7x17 or 8x20 but went for 4x10 for many of Michael's reasons above.

Being able to travel easily is a key for me, plus being able to shoot colour when the time is right, which is a no-no in 8x20 unless you want to stitch digitally.

I went 7x17 for B&W and stuck with 6x17 for travel. Roll film is, for me, so much easier than cut sheets. And it's way easier for me than 8x10 with half septum.

Mind you, 4x10 Velvia scans ARE tempting! Luckily, I never saw one on a light table...