The"4x5 conversion" 16 year report that was then- this is now

<p>WL: Thank you or your expanded response.</p>

<p>I have been active in large format photography since the late 1980s, first as a hobby and later as an art. Working in diagnostic imaging as Nuclear Medicine Technologist, I lived through the conversion from switch and relay driven film capture to full blown computer managed digital capture and storage of image data.</p>

<p>During that time, photographing with view cameras became a high-touch/low-tech counter point to my daily professional work. Today I have a visual impairment that severely interferes with the creative use of a DSLR (viewfinder and data screens etc) , but the deliberative workflow of a view camera on a tripod is still within the envelope of my ability. The creative process (or work-flow) involved with large format imaging is a central part of my photographic experience; an affirmative act in and of itself at times.</p>

<p>At one time, I had hoped that digital imaging might become convenient and affordable option to film, but that willnot happen. Een film is becoming expensive to buy and difficult to get processed.</p>

<p>I understand what you say and can sort of visualize it but then I know digital can be hD EVEN AT ISO 3000 AND HIGHER and if you stop down a LF lens you are not going to see much on the glass back.<br>

you can connect a 800 or a new canon with 36mega to a laptop and then your viewfinder can be as big as you need.<br>

and then with the disability you describe you should get a photo.net member who is a lawyer help you obtain a grant to help you bridge the gap. if you have made a dedicated creative effort I see no reason why that would be so hard on a one shot deal.<br>

where there is a will there is a way and I batch combine my developments for once a month mostly because I don't have the time and then you can simplify to monobaths or lab offers.<br>

I have this guy in Miami that will process and contact 20 sheet of color or bw for 2 each. I doubt diy can be cheaper.<br>

if the size of the screen is the factor then a bigger digi screen is the answer.<br>

if you can make the creative investment then the size of the film will matter otherwise the digital being luminosity adjustable will in the end be more versatile.</p>

<p>William - i'm not entirely sure what the point of your original post was, it is unclear to me. Can you tell me in 1 sentence what the point of your original post was? Is it a question or a statement? Were you looking for answers or feedback of some kind? </p>

<p>WH: Thanks for the lead on processing. I will follow that up.</p>

<p>Also appreciated are your suggestions for going digital. Along the same lines (but in a more limited way) would be using a tablet device with accessory lenses. This would cut out the tethered complexity at the cost of photographic sophistication. I would much prefer to continue with LF view cameras as long as film and processing are available and affordable. The actual act of creating images within the confines of this photographic modality is attractive to me. When I have made images with digital capture, the experience is less satisfying, although a few of these images have been included in shows or exhibitions. </p>

<p>Again: Thanks for your suggestions.</p>

<p>thanks Glenn<br>

No it is simply an itemization of the relevant / related issues to the so called conversion and the evolution of the use based on the necessity versus preference factor. Clearly its not as organized as I would have wished but did my best with the limited time I could allocate.</p>

<p>WH: Organizing my thoughts and putting them down in a manner that makes sense to others is sometimes a problem to me as well. A strategy that is helpful to me is to first write in M-S Word (or whatever word processing format you may have). Time is less a factor as the document may be reviewed over and over before it is sent out. Often, I read the text aloud (to myself!) and find that what is written is not actually what I meant to say. When it does say what I really mean and in a form that others will find acceptable (grammar, spelling, syntax and so on), the text is cut-and-pasted into either an e-mail or to a message board, as is the case here. Feedback from friends and family is that Spell-Check isn't perfect (I still don't spell well), and that I use parentheses too often. Both are true!<br>

<br>

I do not participate in any social media other than this and other photography related websites to avoid conflict and drama.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>unbelievable !!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>quite unbelievable !</p>

<p>the post was not directed towards you or your commerical enterprise, but towards<br>

the moderation staff of this website LOL<br>

you kind of need to lay off the knee-jerk rude responses ?<br>

believe it or not, i also make and sell things, and have for a long time, but when i actually ASKED<br>

the admin staff i was told informative threads ( like this one ) would be deleted and weren't allowed.<br>

this was IDK 7 years ago when i was a litte more acitve than i am now ( mainly because i grew tired of the <br>

flame wars, and tit for tat nasty posts )<br>

now that i know informative / infomercial / feature benefit posts are permitted, i will start making them here in this forum<br>

and others.<br>

and for the record, if it matters, i don't want, and have never wanted one of your cameras. i make cameras myself,<br>

i make lenses, too, and i have no need for a polaroid conversion, best of luck with your feature and benefit thread !</p>

<p>=== good luck drew</p>

<p>In an effort to stay on course and address what is relevant I reiterate that at these crossroads versus 16 years ago IMHO an financial expenditure on film for a larger capture area and ultimately if the case may be for a camera would have to be justified by a noticeable difference and that was the point of this thread.<br /> In addressing that one can notice that while my efforts to pursue the aesthetic aspect of a camera has been ridiculed - those who seek to compete have since incorporated those kinds of efforts convinced people buy these type of cameras for posturing ;) and after examining the cameras with bellows that look like Swiss cheese or borderline on the cheesy what I have to say is 10 years ago I cared and now I don't.<br /> The only thing that I can salvage out of these 16 years is having learned that some people feel sufficiently deserving to pursue their quests .Others convince themselves they have been enlisted by morality to prevent joy riders irresponsible risk taking in pursuing their creative pursuits . I only justify the procurement rent or borrowing of a camera to then invest the effort to take a better picture after which of course the camera itself should no longer be at the center of the interest, If it were that denotes there is no larger aim and obviously the camera is therefore pointless or has to be justified via a list of the stunts it can perform.<br /> I am fortunate to have had 18 years 2 with 3x4 before I started the 4x5 where people who knew me professionally and who were proficient embraced my technique and reported it helped them as I said it would. <br /> There is a kindness and a respect for creativity and creative which supercedes the need for exactitude when describing a camera math as the true math will have to then be the camera math summated to the math it produces in terms of aesthetics.<br /> The failure to communicate stems solely from an unwillingness to raise to the occasion of a higher more fluid purpose.<br /> If the pursuit of spontaneity handheld with large format is something which some don't believe in then I have nothing to defend and I doubt one could at these crossroads .<br /> As I said earlier It is now a matter of preference .<br /> And as far as the blowups by those who find it all suspicious and spam the answer is that from 2010 I have only agreed to sell cameras to a limited number of individuals after verifying they indeed have ;<br /> A) a creative interest<br /> B) the willingness to make the effort<br /> C) the perseverance to stay the course to see the light at the end of the tunnel.</p>

<p>Why?<br /> Simple in the absence of those 3 things there is only undeserving un affording and blame.</p>

<p>here is my spam to photo.net: before you spend a penny on any purchase buy yourself the right to claim the time to think your pictures until they improve and one day you can expect to obtain the most creative images you can as effortlessly as possible. only then can you presume to rate photographic equipment spend all your time discussing it and of course tell others what they should use should only come after your photography with anything but a cellphone is worth a penny more than what it cost you to produce.</p>

<p>Drew your thoughts making sense to others depends strictly on whether they are strictly logical in which case they probably make sense to most people will to whatever extent possible .<br /> My remarks are a synergy of the technology at the service of the capture of spontaneity.<br /> If someone thinks with his heart they will make sense to him/ her to whatever extent the info is of interest to them.<br /> I have no desire to digress . I have been sent to read " how to make friends and influence people " that was the least of the assignments my teachers here have drummed up.<br /> I have singlehandedly placed a camera which was nothing more than a clunky pushcart in the plateau where it got to be considered as the most responsive easiest to use and lightest Lf camera and the influence was that my assurances of what it could do materialized in thousands of pictures which are consistent as to the synergy between the two desired variables a) hd B) the pursuit of spontaneity C) mobility. <br /> that is the only influence I deemed worth pursuing and Its been accomplished beyond what could be expected.<br /> here is a link to a few of the images produced<br /> https://www.facebook.com/Littman-Opus-Arte-Collection-Photo-Galleries-1164820563535967/</p>

<p>Drew I hear your preference as to the workflow that suits your needs. and which makes sense.<br /> The antithesis of that is trying to a) empathize with the subject b) the pursuit of spontaneity.<br /> I'm sure anyone viewing this thread has heard some reference to indigenous people complaining that <br /> early photographers would " steal their soul " in taking their portrait. <br /> To make a long story short and what has been lost in translation referred to these people trying to say that a photograph which takes a lot of time to prepare - requires a pose and stillness robs the life force from the picture and thus in whatever words they could " steal their soul" wasn't a superstition but a quite<br /> accurate description of LF tripod photography for portraits. ( to be continued)</p>

<p>There is an exception to this " stiffness" rule and was mostly accomplished when films got faster and strobes introduced and then using a small iris then the subject was enticed to move or " liven" and so whether a self Portrait By Irving Penn or a ballerinas swirl has been successfully captured in Lf " under controlled environment" and let me stress that meaning no finder was used and the action occurred within a predetermined parameter .<br>

All Good so what is the problem?<br>

you cannot do that with Lf handheld and that is where this camera performed better than others and that is all that can be possible.<br>

can it be as responsive as a cellphone ? <br>

No!<br>

but it is the closest thing to using a cell phone to shoot while shooting a large negative and hoping for the definition and texture.</p>

<p>and that was the purpose of the project .<br>

I'm sure other people have interest in other areas of photography. I've always been interested in People first- then nature and people as they relate to an environment in a reportage approach</p>

You ever watch 1950s, and earlier, press and sports photographers shoot action with a 45 or a Big Bertha? You are

getting carried away with this. Or did you ever watch an old time wedding or portrait photographer shoot an affair on 45?

<p>mr salomon, you forgot to mention graflex slr users / super d's<br>

plenty of ways to shoot LF handheld. slrs are perfectly weighted. while i don't have<br>

a 5x7 at my disposal from all reports they are as easy to use as the 4x5 and smaller models.</p>

 

I should also have included Peter Gowland and the 1500 users of his Gowlandflex, I was one in the mid 60s. But there

are far more people like Mary Ellen Mark and Bruce Davidson who did it all with the Technika, and don't forget those

Arizona Highways images. In short, you use the available tools of the time.

<p>To get best DOF without having to stop down too much get Roundshot 220VR. check their prospectus then you understand-a sketch is there showing how this can be achieved with a slit-can-camera. Mr Littman: i would start developping a 4x5-vaccum-system.</p>