Is dust really such a huge problem??

[sumo_kun]

Hi, I'm going to start playing with LF soon (when I get the money to

buy a camera!) and I have read around various places and it seems

that different people use different film systems. In summary holders

are better for sharpness (marginally) and the quickloads are better

for space/weight and dust control. Well, I want to start LF for

ultimate quality so I was considering loading my own holders but the

dust thing put me off. I just wanted to know if the tradeoff in

quality for less dust is worth it. I am not too concerned with the

weight difference. And for people who use holders, how do you manage

dust and does it work?

I want shoot landscapes with a 4x5 and I like large smooth gradients

(hence the worries on dust). Thanks for any help!

 

Chuk

[tony_wood2]

I started shooting LF just a little over a year ago and the only problem with dust that I have

is the dust that has been gathering on my rolleiflex. My humble opinion on the subject is

to not worry about a problem until you actually encounter it. Also, I've found that film

holders are so easy to load that I personally cannot justify the expense of quickloads.

Don't skimp on film if you like large smooth gradients - I've used budget film and had

issues with "pinholes" in the emulsion.

[daver1]

Hi Chuk,

<p/>

I shoot both. It's been my experience that I have yet to have a dust problem with my holders. With that said, I'm very careful when I load or unload about cleaning them with canned air (I take a can with me for field unloads too). I never use a changing tent (I hear that's a dust nightmare) and I have enough holders to get me through a few days where I can unload in a hotel at night. I still use Quickloads when I go on longer hikes to cut back on weight, but with my 8x10, I have no choice but to use holders.

<p/>

I don't think it's a huge problem if you pay attention to the details. Store your holders in a plastic bag between uses and that will make a huge difference in just keeping the particulates away from the holders in the first place.

<p/>

FWIW,<p/>

-D

<p/>

<a href="http://coyoteimages.com">Coyote Images</a>

[nikos peri]

QuickLoads are good enough for the likes of Joe Cornish, and he's a critical focus freak! The drawback isn't really the flatness issue, it's the cost and film choice issue. Look at how much you're paying for 20 Velvia's in quickloads as opposed to in a box. Without mentioning the dedicated holder you need to buy.<p>

Dust, which I have plenty of flying around, isn't really hard to manage. A little care in where you load, and how you load the holders has made it a non-issue. I use a changing bag, and with an occasional vaccuum of the holders and the bag, have been relatively free of intrusion. If you're shooting in Arizona or Marocco, that might be a different issue. I'd start with the film holders.

[joe_harrigan]

Keep the holders in ziploc bags to keep them dust free.

[troyammons]

I never had any big problems, but I blow out my tent and all the film holders first.

[Troll]

A significant reason that dust is a problem is that many of the LF shooters work in the Western USA, which is generally a very dusty place.

[eric_leppanen]

Chuk,

 

I have obtained razor-sharp results with Quickload and Readyload holders, so I wouldn't be concerned about film flatness issues. 4x5 working apertures are typically f/16 or smaller, which provides sufficient depth of field to accommodate any small variations in film flatness. The main limitations are cost and film stock availability. The availability issue really pertains only to black-and-white, where TMAX-100 and ACROS are your only choices; there are plenty of color film types available.

 

I use traditional holders with my 8x10 setup, and have not had any dust problems (even in my native western USA) as long as I regularly clean my holders and changing tent with either a vacuum cleaner or pressurized air. Storing the holders in ziplock bags or equivalent is a must.

[steve_levine]

"""Is dust really such a huge problem??"""

 

 

And then some.........

[paul_e._cassidy]

You obviously have not yet had to sit down with a 16x20 dw heavy paper print, spot tone, water tray and a few 000 brushes for another hour or two because of dust. . . I will be interested what you think after you experience this very common photographic task for print makers.

 

Enjoy, Paul

[ronald_moravec1]

Clean the darkroom and eliminate all standing dust. Keep the door closed always. Employ an air filter. It now dries dust free after processing and you have a place to load the holders. Keep them clean before, during, and after use.

 

I use a picnic cooler that holds 50 and small lunch coolers that hold 6 for field use.

 

Yea it`s a problem. Dust always settles on the film where it causes the most damage.

[brian_ellis16]

If you keep your holders stored in zip lock bags at all times, removing them only to load film and to make a photograph, you shouldn't have any dust problems with dust in normal conditions. I don't know when I last brushed and shot compressed air in my holders, probably two or three years ago, and I don't have a dust problem, I think because I keep the holders in zip lock bags at all times. I do use Readyloads from time to time and have never noticed any difference in sharpness, marginal or otherwise.

[sergio_ortega7]

Yes...dust is a problem.

 

If you really want to discover the problem of dust for yourself try loading a few film holders inside a darkbag. This is a sure way of having to spend several hours spotting your prints. Remember that most dust issues begin when loading the film into the holders. That's why readyloads are such a joy to use. And protecting your loaded holders when out in the field (ziplock bags are a must for each holder, cleaning your holders after every use in dusty situations, keeping your camera bellows' interior dustfree, etc.) is the important thing.

 

Keep in mind that the dust that you will not notice on your developed LF negatives, or believe to be a problem when visually inspecting your negatives/transparencies, will really reveal themselves as objectionable spots as you enlarge the images. Invisible dust spots on a 4x5 negative will become large chunks of crud when you make a 20x24 enlargement.

 

Subject matter is another issue. If you're photographing scenes with large sky areas (a favorite subject of LF landscape photographers) the dust will generally migrate to the bottom of the holders' film area; this is due to the inverted image on the groundglass/negative and the effects of gravity on dust particles. The enlarged print will generally have a few visible and objectionable spots in the smooth, white sky areas. If your subject primarily consists of heavily textured areas (like woods, trees, rocks, and detailed backgrounds), dust will not be as noticeable since it will blend into the subject matter.

[edward_richards]

It also depends on whether you will be scanning and printing digitally. I see a lot of dust when I scan, but 10 minutes with the clone tool = hours with a brush, and you never have to do it again.

[bruce_watson1]

What Edward said.

 

Basically, it depends on how you value your time. You can spend a bit of time making sure that your film is clean before exposure and during processing, or you can spend much more time spoting. I gave a more in-depth answer to that here:

 

http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/502003.html

 

As to sharpness, I don't see much difference between film holders (I'm using old Regal IIs) and readyloads. At least, none that I can attribute to the hardware - much as I'd like to blame the hardware, it's almost always operator error. Sigh...

 

One of the best tools I've found for fighting dust is to keep my film holders in ziplock freezer bags. The only thing they touch in the field is the bag, and the camera. I never set a film holder on anything - *only* in the ziplock bag. Simply, but amazingly effective.

[allen_whittier]

I use a deionizer blowing over my workspace to eliminate the static attraction between the dust and film. It's amazing how well it works. If you live in a dry climate with a lot of dust it's a lifesaver. I also use zip lock bags for my holders.

[fred_anderson2]

I use a small portable, rechargeable vacuum cleaner- a dustbuster, on location. When I

change film, I vacuum the changing bag and the holders. I shoot in Spain, and the dust is

really bad. Since I've started using this method, there's a lot less retouching to do.

[mike_grigsby]

It's a big enough problem that I stopped using 4x5 altogether for many years until I happened upon quickload film. Acros Quickload made shooting with LF fun again because I don't have to worry much about dust.

 

I hear all kinds of stories about thin negatives and flatness problems, but frankly my shots are as sharp with quickload film as anything I ever shot with holders.

[jtk]

This is not rocket science.

 

Dust is only a problem for sloppy photogs. It's no worse in the "West" than anywhere else because you keep the holders in a dust free bag when they're not in the camera.

 

You make a habit of blowing dust off the dark slide (whether there is any dust or not) for every shot.

 

You clean your holders between uses with an air can, you keep your holders in a plastic bag when loaded or in storage.