About Joe Cornish and the scope of the Large Format Photography Forum

[bob carnie]

I met Joe when he came to Canada for a workshop, he was still doing film capture at that time, we put on a rather large show of his work, It does not surprise me that colour workers like Joe and others are moving to Phase One type of gear. I have many clients that have made the switch and the work is outstanding.

It has become increasingly difficult and expensive for many to keep using film and the switch to these devices makes sense. For my personal work I still use film as I am interested in cross process and solarization which is best suited in an analogue platform. I doubt my type of work can be duplicated using a phase one. But if I wanted to travel and make shows from that travel I would certainly move in the direction Joe has gone.

Joe btw is one of the nicest person anyone could hope to meet and he is a wonderful teacher to boot.

[paulbarden]

It seems to me that "large format photography" specifically describes photography that uses "large" (4x5 and up) sheets of film. That inherently excludes digital media simply because its not about the medium of sheet film. I have no problem with maintaining the current boundaries that define this forum.
Discussion of the earlier film-based work of Clyde Butcher and Gregory Crewdson are within the definition of this forum, but the current digital works those two artists produce is not, in my opinion. I am not at all suggesting that Crewdson and Butcher are making "less virtuous" work in choosing digital tools instead of film, but I do believe their new digital works do not fall within the purview of this particular forum.

[kevinjp]

I have no comment on what posts belong where, but thanks for posting the video, I watched it yesterday when I saw it. I love watching videos featuring Joe Cornish and try to learn all I can from them.

[xkaes]

I don't quite understand this issue/problem/controversy.

If I want to add a smaller format camera or film holder/digital sensor to the back of my large format camera there are enough sub-categories on this Forum to choose from for discussion. But I probably wouldn't use that. I'd discuss it on a different forum dedicated to 35mm, medium format, or digital gear -- because it's not large format photography.

There are lots of very nice 2x3/6x9 view cameras -- film and digital -- but they are not large format. Still, they can be discussed here -- in the appropriate category -- just like anything else.

[r.e.]

@xkaes,

I think that the issue is pretty clear from the exchange with Oren above. The only place to discuss the cameras and image capture devices you mention is The Lounge, although there is one category in the forum proper where images can be posted. There are no other available categories. The only reason that Cornish's video wasn't sent to The Lounge, along with the other five posts, is that he mostly talks in the video about his approach to taking the image. Note that the thread also discussed an in-camera stitching method that didn't even exist when these "rules" were apparently adopted almost nine years ago.

[xkaes]

"Stitching" eight 35mm negatives together -- whether with glue or a computer -- does not a 4x5" negative make.

[paulbarden]

So, the Phase One XF IQ4 camera (apparently the camera Mr. Cornish uses) has a 151 megapixel sensor in it. The output of the sensor is (supposedly) 47 X 35 inches at 300 dpi.

I guess the question should be: does the Phase One XF IQ4 camera qualify as a "large format photography" tool?
If the answer is "yes", then it qualifies for the term "large format photography".

I'm honestly not sure if it does meet the requirements. It is my distinct impression that the LFPF is specifically about FILM photography, not just about the SIZE of the film used. Its both things that make this forum about a specific way of making photographs.

[r.e.]

"Stitching" eight 35mm negatives together -- whether with glue or a computer -- does not a 4x5" negative make.

I'm not talking about 35mm negatives. Nor am I talking about what is normally understood as stitching.

[r.e.]

So, the Phase One XF IQ4 camera (apparently the camera Mr. Cornish uses) has a 151 megapixel sensor in it. The output of the sensor is (supposedly) 47 X 35 inches at 300 dpi.

I guess the question should be: does the Phase One XF IQ4 camera qualify as a "large format photography" tool?
If the answer is "yes", then it qualifies for the term "large format photography".

I'm honestly not sure if it does meet the requirements. It is my distinct impression that the LFPF is specifically about FILM photography, not just about the SIZE of the film used. Its both things that make this forum about a specific way of making photographs.

That isn't what the 2014 "rule" says. It states expressly that use of a 4x5 digital sensor comes within the forum requirements. As far as I can tell, no such sensor even existed in 2014. One does as of last year, which as a practical matter means that people who have a lot of money to spend on first generation technology are welcome to post, but people like Joe Cornish aren't.

In 2014 somebody made a deliberate decision to make this forum gradually irrelevant to photography with view cameras outside a niche group, at least until a 4x5 digital sensor is available that normal mortals can afford.

[Oren Grad]

So, the Phase One XF IQ4 camera (apparently the camera Mr. Cornish uses) has a 151 megapixel sensor in it. The output of the sensor is (supposedly) 47 X 35 inches at 300 dpi.

I guess the question should be: does the Phase One XF IQ4 camera qualify as a "large format photography" tool?
If the answer is "yes", then it qualifies for the term "large format photography".

I'm honestly not sure if it does meet the requirements. It is my distinct impression that the LFPF is specifically about FILM photography, not just about the SIZE of the film used. Its both things that make this forum about a specific way of making photographs.

As stated in the preamble at the top of our guidelines/FAQ page:

We would also consider a digital back with a nominal sensor size of 4"x5" or larger to be LF, as well, regardless of technology.

The only products I'm aware of that meet that criterion are the LargeSense LS45 and LS911 backs. We've had a bit of discussion about those, but they're more a technical curiosity than a practical product because of their very high price ($26,000 and $106,000, respectively), handling and performance limitations. For those who can afford to spend that kind of money, medium format digital is far more practical for real-world applications and will deliver much higher technical image quality to boot.

So in principle our definition does not exclude digital capture, but in practice our scope continues to be effectively film capture only for now.