Women using Large Format

Welcome to the forum Sandy! I hope we don't bore you away

again.<br>The rest of you guys, just watch your language from now on.

OK?

Hi SAndy,

<p>

Another female checking in. I'm not new to photography but I am

fairly new to large format. I have both a 4x5 Speed Graphic and an

8x10 ROC Empire State. I haven't used the 8x10 yet as I'm still

collecting parts and pieces when the budget allows. I've only used

the 4x5 for Polaroid work so far. I guess I hadn't thought about the

saftey factor yet as I usually have a friend out with me and they are

complaining about how "fiddlely" I am with the camera. I'm very slow

with the setup and picture taking thus far. I suppose safety is

something I should be concerned about but my major interest is

portrait photography so I assume I most always will have someone with

me. No one has tried to talk to me about my camera yet but I live in

a very "artsy" neighborhood so folks on the street doing strange

things is taken in stride. As far as the tech and gear part of LF I'm

very into both. I'm also into DIY and plan to build an 8x10 camera

this summer. My main reasons for LF are the big negative. I'm into

alternative proceses and don't have room for a proper darkroom to

enlarge negatives. Also, I find it fascinating to see images on the

ground glass.

Based on profiles in View Camera (I've got them all from the first

issue; thanks Steve!), women seem to be represented in LF about as

much as in any other profession/avocation. As to why they don't

frequently post to a forum such as this, could they be reticent to

speak without absolutely certainty that what they're saying is

correct? That is a characteristic of many women I've worked with - -

in a completely non-photographic career - - that frequently doesn't

show up in men. One can see hip-shooting all the time here, at

photo.net, and on other related forums. Also, posting does put one's

words literally in front of the entire world. Young girls have been

observed to refrain from speaking in class when agressive boys jump to

answer all the questions. Could it just be continuation of an

established behavior?

Hi Sandy. There's at least one other here. I've been doing LF with a

wisner field 4x5 for about one year now (medium format before that

for several years), and am an almost daily reader of this forum. I've

learned a lot from the (mostly) guys who post regularly--the knowledge

base represented here is very impressive. I do landscapes, mostly in

color negative, and make my own color prints. II don't have a

well wrought theory about why there are so few women represented, but

am glad to see I'm not the only one!

Sharon

HI SANDY -- I've noticed the same thing Brian Ellis mentions, i.e.,

that women seem to hold their own, at the very least, in academic LF

settings, including workshops (also in spreads in View Camera and

such), but seem miserably under-represented on this website (and

similar stuff, like ebay). I don't understand what computers have to

do w/ it. I don't see the computer world as blue (as opp. to pink)

collar, etc. Actually, most of what I do is either out in the desert

(I live in New Mexico), where I rarely see anybody, male or female, or

at home in my "studio".... On the strength issue, I have no advantage

over anyone, male or female, so I first of all try to adhere to Brett

Weston's great maxim, "If it's farther than 200 yards from the road,

it isn't scenic" (or words to that effect). Seriously, though, and

because it's hard to have an "assistant" with me very often, I have

thought about using some kind of cart, like a good manual golf cart

or, since the desert terrain is usually very soft and irregular, maybe

one of those baby strollers you see people jogging with. You know

what I mean? Like with the big bicycle-type wheels? Seems like you

could adapt one of those to carry a fair amount of LF stuff....

--jeff buckels (albuquerque)

One more female LF photographer here. Well, my Arca-Swiss 4x5 arrived

this week (my first LF) but I haven't had time to take a shot with it

yet, so I guess I can't quite call myself a LF photographer yet. :-)

<p>

I tend to lurk on a lot of discussion groups covering a gamut of

topics. I rarely contribute because I don't mind researching to see

if my question has already been answered and typically find that it

already has. And given my experience level I'm not terribly

comfortable offering advice.

<p>

I basically use the forums to learn what I need to know to solve the

problem of the day and get out. I look forward to the day when I can

offer photographic advice feeling I have a wide enough range of

experience in the area to be confident in my decision. Until then

I'll continue to lurk.

<p>

Sorry for the rambling -- I'm "lurking" as I wait for the dryer to

finish so I can complete packing for my vacation to Romania

tomorrow!!! The A-S is staying home, but the Canon system is going

with me along with more film than I thought was humanly possible to

transport.

So far, not much attention has been given here to the historical

dimension, but the case of the seminal Group f.64 is certainly

relevant. Formed in the San Franciso Bay area in 1932, the original

members were Ansel Adams, Imogen Cunningham, John Paul Edwards, Sonya

Noskowiak, Henry Swift, Willard Van Dyke, and Edward Weston; and when

later that year the Group collectively exhibited their work at the de

Young Museum in SF, they invited Preston Holder, Consuelo Kanaga,

Alma Lavenson, and Brett Weston to join them. Thus two of the

original seven, and four of the eleven exhibitors were women. The

subject of women in Group f.64 has been discussed by Therese Thau

Heyman in her exhibition catalogue Seeing Straight. The f.64

Revolution in Photography (Oakland Museum 1992), pp. 28-29:

<p>

"The study of Group f.64 invites speculation about why so many women

were empowered through their association with a male friendship group

that might have ideologically subjugated women as darkroom assistants

and mere receptors for male creativity.

<p>

"Very likely the question of how women were accepted in the group was

colored by the changing circumstances of women after World War I,

when the "New Woman" emerged out of the battle for the right to work

and vote. As early as 1913, eager women writers explained admiringly

that Anne Brigman and Laura Adams, a successful San Francisco

portrait photographer, could be independent in photography, as this

work was 'suitable' for women, needing no large capital outlay, no

long schooling or learning beyond the usual education of women.

Women's 'intuition' was cited as justifying their special talent for

portraiture, particularly--it comes as no surprise--portraits of

children."

<p>

Following brief sketches of Cunningham, Noskowiak, Kanaga, and

Lavenson, she concludes:

<p>

"These remarkable women were acknowledged as peers by their Group

f.64 male contemporaries. Only later did a silence come to surround

their work--a silence created by exhibition curators, art dealers,

and photographic historians in the 1950s. Although Lavenson and

Cunningham continued to live and photograph in the Bay Area, they

were not singled out for solo shows until their careers were

validated by their remarkably long lives. As Cunningham noted, she

and other women photographers in their fifties were invisible; only

when she reached seventy did she become a celebrity."

<p>

Despite the long wait for recognition, these women (and their work)

did, as we all know, become well known, especially Cunningham, and

with them Dorothea Lange and others, some of whom have already been

mentioned in this and earlier threads. Discussions of these gender

occupational issues often get around to the presence or absence of

pioneers who may serve as role models for those who follow, but

whatever are the reasons for the current apparent dearth of female LF

photographers (at least in this forum), a lack of illustrious

forerunners is certainly not one of them. All the best, Nick.

<p>

P.S. Whenever the 8 x 10 goes out, my wife Marilyn and I work as a

team and she enjoys all aspects of the shooting.

Put your camera bag/gear under the tripod when you are "under the

cloth." That way you can keep an eye on it. As for why there seem to

be few women in LF, there seem to be few women in photography. I go

shooting at least 2 or 3 days a week and when I am out and about it's

my impression that out of all the photographers I see, 9 of 10 are

men. Just my observation. I wrote a thread on Philosophy of

Photography forum about the differences between men's and women's view

in photography. I feel there is a subtle difference in viewpoint and

how a subject is handled. And in the colors used along with the

contrast of the image. I belong to PPofA which is a professional

photographers organization, dealing with wedding and portraiture, and

see a real difference there. I welcome all the women who are here with

us. LF is a special way of seeing and hope you all stay with it. James

Hi Sandy. Yet another woman LF photographer. I work in every format

up to and including 11 x 14. The latter is a real challenge, but I

have carried it several hundred feet. I usually use a heavy duty

luggage cart for the 8 x 10 and 11 x 14, though that can be a problem

on uneven turf (like wandering through sagebrush). One good thing

about 11 x 14 is that it makes the 4 x 5 seem miniscule. I don't

photograph in an urban environment, so don't have many of the concerns

one would have there. I often find a crowd gathering to watch me

photograph and someone making a comment about Ansel Adams, but for the

most part people are just interested and want to know more. I give my

lecture on large format photography, and that pleases them. Paula

Chamlee comes to mind as another large format user, as well as Lois

Conner and Linda Connor. Lois Conner has carried her 7 x 17 banquet

camera through China on a bicycle! I just discovered this web site

recently, so haven't input anthing yet. Good luck!

Don't forget Elsa Dorfman, queen of 20x24" Polaroid. She has a nice

website at elsa.photo.net.

Jeane, you mentioned sage brush. Do you shoot out West? I am always

looking for other LF photographers who travel a bit. If you don't

mind, where do you shoot when outdoors? I'm out of San Diego and

shoot in the southwest often. James

Hi again, thanks for all your comments, this has been fascinating.

Lots of great insight. I must respectfully disagree with Jonathan and

Dominique who suggest that gender is not an issue in photography or

technology. If it were not, there would be the same percentage of

females on this forum as there are in the world at large. Biologists

have determined that male and female brains are physiologically very

different. For those who teach photography, as I do, it's important to

realize that there are differences. (For those who are married it is

also important!) I told one of my colleagues about this discussion,

and she agreed that it was very difficult to get her women students to

use the view camera, *unless* they were assigned to work in pairs.

Then they loved it. One of my female students watched me using my

compact little Arca 6x9 and said, "That makes me like the view camera!

I hated it last year when I had to use those big clunky 4x5s from

school." Perhaps photo departments should include a few 2 1/4 x 3 1/4

format view cameras in their equipment rooms.

To add to the list of women who do use LF, there's Jeanne Birdsall,

who uses a 4x5 for studio portraits and landscapes (printed in

glorious gum bichromate). Today's her 50th birthday. Happy Birthday,

Jeanne!

There is also educator/writer/photographer/artist/critic who uses

a 4x5 sometimes. And I should think virtually every female

commercial photographer (and by that I don't include wedding or

most portrait photographers) uses a 4x5 at some point in their

career. <P>At <A HREF = http://www.fotofest.org> Fotofest</A>I

regularly see a lot of woman who use large format cameras for

their work.

Thanks, Sandy. That's just what I wanted -- for a lot of strangers

to know I'm 50 lousy years old. But enough about that. I've also

worked with an ancient (circa 1910) 8x10 camera in the studio to

create paper negatives -- they make great platinum prints. I took

the 8x10 outside once or twice and was overwhelmed with the bulkiness

and weight, but the 4x5s (old press cameras, usually -- I'm not big

on spending money) travel all right -- I've taken a few to England.

If only the filmholders were lighter. I've even worked a few times

with a 12x20 banquet camera, but it was old and falling apart and was

just too much -- or so I decided after sawing a hole in my studio

ceiling so that I could use the camera vertically -- without the

hole, I couldn't get the slide out of the filmholder. I certainly

agree with Sandy that men and women often approach technical problems

differently. My love for large format comes from letting me avoid

some techical stuff, i.e. enlarging. I love contact printing the

original negative -- I love the purity of it.

<p>

P.S. Sandy is still several years away from 50.

Hi All,

Im a female too, but I only make use of my gender, if I take portraits

of male politicians or other prominent males in my press photography.

I like to see my self as one of the lucky last few women in a male

dominated occupation. Soon, the world of professional photographers

will be half/half, and I will no longer 'stand out in the crowd'.

I hire LF and always have an assistant or a friend to stand behind me

on location.

I believe in not 'seeing' the difference between our genders. I think

it stops a lot of young women, if they focus on the majority of men in

a group/forum/gathering etc.

Just press on and do your thing, whoever you are, whereever you are.

Life is too short to be swamped in 'disadvantages' and 'unfairness'

and 'unequality'.

And by pressing on, one may just make a frontfigure for other women to

follow. (Gosh, Ill stop here before my head explodes).

Thanks to all on this list for the great contributions. I thoroughly

enjoy this list !! -and please excuse my poor english.

Si

Female photog. here. New to the large format family-8x10. I have been

a professional photographer since I was 20 years old and learned that

photography is a male dominated industry. I actually had a client

walk up to me, with all my equipment in hand, and said "honey, where

is HE and he shouldn't let you carry all of this stuff." I

immediately replied (in SHOCK) "I am the photographer." she then

replied "How old are you?" Well you could just imagine what my reply

would have been next, but in trying to be a professional I blew off

the comment and continued to find out what needed to be done.

<p>

So now am will take on the large format industry in stride and step

in line with my famous female counter parts.

Theory for you - we're all busy asking for directions to the shoot while the women are already there and shooting.

Hey, I'm a 16 year old guy, and I get way too much uncomfortable attention when shooting with my Bronica. And the female kind I don't mind. It's just an excuse. If it wasn't your view camera, it would be your car, or maybe the brand of hiking boots.

I don't know why. My mother was an amateur photographer, and she never bothered with a lot of coorespondance either. She just went out and shot. As many people have theorized, maybe it's the technology thing.

Hello all. I'm new to large format photography and am waiting impatiently for my first lens to arrive in the mail...

I've been serious about learning photography for exactly one year now, practicing with a Nikon FTn so as to learn all the basics. I know I'll have to use the hand-held meter for the LF, but think that will be okay. I inherited a 4x5 Nagaoka from my father-in-law which prompted the foray into large format but I would have done it anyway sooner or later.

I'm so excited about all this! :)

Okay, I'll admit that I'm 54 and learning a whole new area of life.

Welcome aboard Susan. I'm sure you'll have a wonderful time with your new LF gear.

Ed