4x5 or larger film.
4x5 or larger film.
Depends upon my location, where I live, I tell them it is like recording music with analog equipment, like Steve Albini, who is a very well known in these parts for only using 2 inch tape to record with. Then I ask them, do you know how to set the points on your cafe racer motorcycle? And they brightly say, sure it's easy. Then I go talk to the best looking woman in the place.
I'd say that it's photography with improbably large sheets of film and cameras which allow me to get the picture the way I want it.
This is probably why I don't get asked to parties where Miles Davis is played.
Mike
Politically, aerodynamically, and fashionably incorrect.
At a cocktail party, the answer is anything bigger than 6.41 inches
Further explanation in the form of (4 squared +5 squared = answer squared) should not be given.
Mark, this is definitely the most eloquent and erudite explanation to this interesting question. If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to quote you word for word (including the vomiting on the shoes part!) should I ever find myself in the situation Heroique describes. Very nicely put!
I have started explaining that I use pre- WWI cameras and methods, and as to 'why', that it is because I collect & restore antique cameras and lenses. It's getting harder to make the argument along the lines of image quality, especially if they have seen my images.
This actually happened to me once. I could tell that the question was just polite, not real interest. So I dumbed it way down and kept it way short. Something along the lines of:
"You remember back in school when your class covered the US westward expansion? There's always this picture of a photographer up on a ledge overlooking a huge valley. All you can remember of the camera is that accordion-looking bellows and the tripod. Sometimes the photographer has his head and part of the camera covered by a dark cloth while he's working. Remember that? That's me."
Bruce Watson
Bookmarks