How did you know you were a LF person?

[larry_s__indiana_]

How did you know, (or what clues did you have) that you would be interested in shooting LF? This

questions is particularly for those who moved to LF from another format. What made you think about it?

 

I'm a graphic designer (for 25 years), I shoot DSLR for images I use in my work. I have a little itch about LF

that won't go away, but I live in a small town and don't know any one who has a camera I could try. I know

used equipment can be fairly cheap, but a few hundred dollars is still a chunk of change to me. I have no

traditional darkroom skills, I've done Photoshop since 2.0.

 

I'd love to hear about your experience, thanks for all replies.

[richard_ilomaki7]

Larry

 

I got bitten when I first saw some 16 x 20 platinum prints at an exhibit of fashion images by Horst P. Horst. I then saw some Ansel Adams prints from LF, then some 8 x 10 contact prints and the infection had taken hold and was seriously festering.

 

I also was attracted to the need for a slow, deliberate, careful process, as opposed to the click click click of smaller formats. It reminded me of what was attributed to Michelangelo, when starting a sculpture: he walked around the blank piece of marble and wondered who was in there.

 

In addition, the basic simplicity and lack of gizmos led me further.

 

Cheers

[manjo]

I like to look at slides and not at a monitor, under light table or projected there is no real substitute for viewing pleasure with slides. So I used to shoot 35mm / 220 slide film.

 

A friend of mine used to make these (large format) cameras from wood. I did not know much abt them at that time and they looked liked really too complicated to me. But then he showed me his photographs (BW and color slides) and I was blown away. Its all abt the movements that attacted me. The perspective correction, the control, and the meditative approach to studying the subject, light and making the shot. The time it took me to shoot couple of bracketed shots on my MF he shot one (but good one).

 

He gave me one of his toyo 45, and that was the start for me. Now I can take the negatives from my album and see them on my light table, its all abt the vewing experience for me. Also, I have a epson 4990 scanner, scans from 4x5 are pretty good, and digital cant beat that (IMHO).

 

But for me it was

1. the viewing experience

2. The approach to making a photograph with a view camera, it makes you think, visualize and make a shot that I can keep for a lifetime.

[randall ellis]

For me, it was the level of control afforded by large format cameras, the large image on the ground glass, and the idea of using a camera that was made by hand got me rolling. Once I started using 4x5, I quickly found that I loved it and now own an 8x10 camera as well as a 4x5. At first, I needed to be forced to slow things down and think more about what I was doing, and using a field camera will certainly do that, but now I do this automaticaly (with every format) and I find that my work has dramaticaly improved.

 

Darkroom work is quite easy, and once you try it you may find it very hard to stop. There are many books, as well as information on the 'net, about getting started, and you have the resources of online groups like this site and apug.org to help you if you get stuck. I have a bathroom/darkroom which takes about 15 minutes to setup and tear down and have no problems at all. Some will say the smell, etc. is a problem, but I've never seen it.

 

If you want to try someone elses gear, I would suggest asking around the local photo club to see if there are any film users there, and if so, if you could take a look at their equipment. Most LF people that I know happily help anyone interested in getting started with the big cameras. If you can't find anyone that way, ask in the large format section of this site or go to apug.org and ask there. You should be able to get a 4x5 Speed Graphic for a reasonable price, or an older monorail like the Calumet/Orbit/Burke and James, etc. in your budget range. I must warn you though, getting into large format can be addictive. I started out with a $250 setup (4x5 camera, holders, and one lens) and shortly after got an 8x10, three more lenses, and all sorts of other stuff. Consider yourself warned!

 

- Randy

[steven_kefford2]

Two things. First, for a I course I was studying, I had to write an essay on different camera types, so the more research I did, the more intrigued I became. I already had a tilt/shift lens for my Canon SLR, so I already had some interest. Secondly, I am an akward *****, and like to do the opposite of what everybody else is doing. So if everybody is going small and digital, I went large and analogue.

 

Steve

[david_starr3]

After many years of 35mm, I got a 6x7 camera. I really liked it, especially the large negative. So, I decided to go larger & got a 4x5. The instant I saw the first negative come out of the fixer, I was hooked. I'm now seriously considering using the RB-67 as my small format camera.

[capocheny]

Having worked in a camera store on weekends for the majority of my high school years,

there were many photographers who brought in their Linhof Technikas for either trade or

repair. The Technikardan was also "the talk of the town" in those days.

 

At that time, I shot mostly Hasselblad and didn't know anything about 4x5, much less 5x7

or 8x10. The only thing I DID know was that photographers using the Zone System often

used these cameras.

 

So, one day, the Sinar rep came in and we began talking about what these cameras were

used for and their capabilities. The long and short of it was that he loaned me a P2 with a

set of Broncolor studio lights. I took my first lf image with that set of equipment in 1983.

 

I then went on a hiatus and didn't use lf for many, many years. One day, I decided I needed

to slow my life down a bit. I ended up buying a Sinar X and an F2 through the bay. Great

cameras!

 

Since that time, I've gotten Dorffs in both 5x7 and 8x10 formats. The 8x10 is as large as I

expect to go.

 

When you first see a proprly exposed LF transparency on the light box... you'll KNOW it's

the way to go! And, I knew I was definitely a lf person when I bought my first lf camera and

saw the results!

 

Haven't looked back since!

 

Give it a go, Larry... you'll become one of us soon enough! :)

 

Cheers

[leonard_evens]

I would suggest reading Steve Simmons's book Using the View Camera. That will a good idea of what is involved in using a view camera.

 

If you buy a view camera and one lens to get started, and then decide you aren't interested, you can probably get back most of what you spent by selling it on e-bay. Renting is another possible option, but that might be a lot more expensive. (Look at www.helixphoto.com for some rental prices.)

 

I think trying to tackle both darkroom photography and the use of a view camera is likely to be too much. If you start off with transparency film and have it developed commercially, you can at least look at the results on a light table. But I think you will find that pretty limiting after not too long. Given your background, it would make more sense to consider scanning. There are several scanners that will handle 4 x 5 film and produce images you can print with an ink jet printer. And of course a scanner can be used for other purposes.

 

If after a while, you want to get into darkroom work, you can start by learning to develop your own b/w film. Who know, you may even become entranced by the Zone System. That won't cost too much and can be done in a minimal bathroom darkroom. You can even graduate to making 4 x 5 contact prints without too much trouble. And you can still scan the negatives and make inkjet prints. The next phase, a 4 x 5 enlarger, is a much bigger step. It will require a serious darkroom and involve signficant cost. But you don't really have to go there if you find scanning does what you want.

[leicaglow]

An avid collector of Ansel Adams books, I went to a retrospective exhibit and saw it first hand, including some giant color shots. I bought The Camera, Negative, and Print books and studied every word. I went out and bought the camera and a couple of lenses, along with a Honeywell spot meter and was hooked.

[paul_kent2]

1. I realised that my best images were carefully planned, facilitating the use of almost any

format

 

2. I got to the point where I had too many images in 35mm that I wished were on larger film

 

3. I wanted some perspective control.

 

4. I tried MF, but the little viewing screens were not suited to high precision work.

[michael_kadillak13]

When I wanted to get to the top of the mountain as it related to making images. Could not decide on which 4x5 to start out with so I started with 8x10 and have not looked back. I now shoot 5x7, 8x10, 11x14, 8x20 and 12x20. Two things I learned along the way. It is not cheap. Secondly, it is not easy but you can get out of it what you put into it.

 

In all honesty if a couple of hundred dollars is a chunk of change to you there is no reason to acquire equipment that you are very likely not going to be willing, ready or able to regularly use. I had fantasies about big LF cameras for years but I was honest with myself that if was not financially in the cards at that time. After maxing out my retirement account investments and paying my bills there was just not enought there to regularly buy film, chemicals, paper and presentation materials.

 

It took me a number of years of hard work to start my own business and get it profitable so that I could realize the dream of doing it right. All of the equipment I need (or wanted), a darkroom and a chest freezer stocked with film and paper to the nines. It hated to have to wait for what I felt that I wanted to do a long time ago but so many things in life revolve around timing. For me it provided an objective to channel all of my hard work and planning so I could get there and the view is simply marvelous.

 

Don't give up the dream. You have plenty of time to read and learn while you find the disposable income to allocate towards LF.

 

Cheers!

[pico_digoliardi]

First I shot 35mm for newspaper and PJ work.

 

Later I realized the images I like the most could be done with MF, so I went MF.

 

And lately with the ravages of old age I realize I could do the same with LF, and just move more slowly.

 

It's about quality. Too bad quality of life does not follow.

[doc_w]

The reasons I shoot large format are not as important as the reasons why you would. It sounds to me like you don't really have a reason so far. My advice is to skip it until you know what it is you want to do.

[beepy]

When I found myself shooting something larger than a 4x5 camera:-)

<p>

Seriously, for me it was dissatisfaction with fine detail in landscape photographs using the

highest end digital SLRs I had (Nikon D1x and then Canon 1Ds and then (less so) Canon

1Ds Mark II). It was the first driving function - fine detail in moderate to big images. I

shoot the 1Ds Mark II and 4x5 - I really pull out the 4x5 when I have an image I really care

about that I want capability for large prints in future.

<p>

Second (though certainly possible in the 35mm world with a tilt/shift lens) - movements to

control plane of focus. While infrequent, I do use a range of view camera moments to

capture an image I want.

<p>

I think the more interesting thing was that I had very capable high end digital SLRs. I

decided that if I was going to deal with film, it had to be worth my while. This to me meant

not even considering 35mm film camera solutions, and after some research skipping

medium format also. For the work that film adds to my "workflow" (I do my own B+W

development now), I was looking for value add capabilities that my digital SLR didn't

deliver.

<p>

Beyond that - you know? I just get a kick out of the large format experience. The pace.

The way I view the world when using large format. The limitations (thought I do shoot

handheld).

[steve_levine]

Let's be honest, the first time one sees a LF chrome on a light table, you're hooked.

[larry_s__indiana_]

These answers are fantastic! This has really been helpful. I first started being interested

when

I saw a Julia Magaret Cameron exhibition in a museum; I was just entranced. When I look

at

stock books and source books now for my business, I try to pick out what I think was shot

with LF. I've been busy being a dad fo a long time, and running my design business, but I

have kids starting college this fall, so I'll have a lot more time to look into this. I'm very

interested in location portrait work.

 

Thanks so much for the input!

 

Larry

[doc_w]

"{This has really been helpful. I first started being interested when I saw a Julia Magaret Cameron exhibition in a museum; I was just entranced."

 

NOW you're talkin'! If that kind of portrait work attracts you (and I love it, btw), then I strongly suggest that you START with an 8x10 and do only contact printing, working your way into alternative/Victorian processes. You might consider getting a smaller back for it as well, even a 4x5, although a 5x7 is nice, to save money while you practise printing.

[jimsimmons]

When I saw a show of Lewis Baltz 5x7 contact prints - Orange County industrial parks. They had a crystalline clarity to them that no 5x7 print I'd made from 35mm came even close to.

[ilkka]

I read Ansel Adams' Natural Light Photography when I was 12 and Weston's Daybooks when I was 14. Both borrowed from library, more than once. Somehow it just grew from there, from 35mm to 6x6, but I stopped at 4x5 and have no interest in going bigger (except 6x17).

[User_503771]

I got interested in photography as an aid to quickly draw subjects for linoleum- and wood-cut block printing.

 

Guys at a magazine where I worked as a typesetter were helpful in introducing me to the whole shenanigan.

 

I started out with 35mm, and got hooked on the darkroom work. Then I started reading -- magazines, books, etc. Hmmmm, medium format?

 

(Need I say that my interest diverged somewhat from block printing?)

 

Wow, the detail! Much improved over 35mm! But then I noticed that perspective control was an issue. And, more detail is possible?

 

So, of course, I had to try 4x5.

 

Next was 5x7, then 8x10. My next project is a rebuild of an 8x10 camera into a 7x17....

 

Big negs just sing, and in high fidelity. And you can just get lost in a good print from a nice, big, well-composed negative.

 

It's all about beauty for me -- art and life for me, ever since I was a little kid, have always been inextricably intertwined.

 

Going on 30 years now -- it was hard to remember there, for a few moments, how it started for me.

 

Thanks for asking....

[sumo_kun]

I got into LF because I wanted to have high quality medium-sized prints made. I started with 135 and I then moved to MF 67 which I used for about 2 years and the I decided to make the dive into LF. I started with a cheap second hand calumet cadet and a cheapo normal lens because I wasn't too sure if it was for me but I started making some photos with that setup. The firt time I saw a 6x7 slide on the table I was really impressed but a 4x5 LF slide is just sooooo beautiful. I was hooked even though my photos were still not very good. I just knew there was a potential quality to be had which could not be matched by 6x7. Looking back, I think that 4x5 is all good and happy but I still have uses for the other smaller formats. I do landscape photography and when I get serious with it the 4x5 comes out. For scouting though and just normal snaps I use the smaller formats. The LF is the final capture for a particular image for me in many respects.

 

LF is not cheap and not really easy but the effort you put into making a photograph is worth it and it shows in the end.

[Troll]

I've been shooting 4x5 since 1951. It was the way we all started then.

<p>I can honestly say that in all those years I've never made a LF picture that I can be proud of, but using the big camera on its tripod, slowly and deliberately, and the subsequent darkroom work is for me an emotional upper of biblical proportions.

[brian_ellis16]

The first time I made an 8x10 b&w print from my 35mm negatives that had been shot with my brand new top-of-the len Nikon pro lenses I was very disappointed in the lack of detail and tonal gradations. Using TMax 100 film and with the best lenses Nikon offered I was expecting my prints to look like Ansel Adams'. When they didn't I moved to 6x7 which was good but I attended a John Sexton workshop and learned of the benefits of camera movements and individually developing each negatives so that led to 4x5, which led to 5x7, which led to 8x10, which led back to 4x5.

[garethspics]

Getting out a 5x4 camera when all around you have DSLRs is like turning up at a smart venue in a 1928 Bentley and parking it next to a BMW Z4 or Mercedes SLK.

[barryjyoung]

I was repairing cameras out of my pawnshop. Mostly 35mm. A guy brought in a Deardorff which needed a small easy part made. That was that. I was amazed at how well the manufacturer had been able to shape the wood and form the metal with an exceedingly elegant solution for every aspect of camera building. The camera took my breath away with its simple answers to complex questions. Some people find meaning in religion, some in education or travel, for me it is big cameras. The gear. I love to look at my chromes on a light table too, and I enjoy printing 4x5 and contact printing 8x10, BUT, I have to say more than any of that, it is the mechanism itself, the inner workings of a Copal shutter, the incredible amount of design that goes into a lens, the real beauty of an iris diaphragm, yeah, for me it is the gear. I guess that is why I make cameras a whole lot more than I shoot them.