nathan_congdon Posted June 17, 2002 Share Posted June 17, 2002 I've been shooting 12X20 for about 6 months now, and have carried the beast to California, Australia, Bolivia and Peru (to the top of Machu Picchu: not necessarily recommended!) I find that I really love the format, and enjoy using this camera immensely despite all the obvious difficulties. I thought it would be interesting to ask other ULF (ultra-large format) users out there: what especially appeals to you about the format/camera that you use? Why do you use it? What do you hate about it? Of course, former ULF users are welcome to chime in with answers as to why they gave up using their ULF camera. I'll start with my own answers: 1. I really like the aspect ratio on 12X20. It has challenged me to think about space in my chosen area (almost exclusively portraiture)in a very different way.2. I love the big image on the GG3. I really like a negative that I can pick up and take in at a comfortable viewing distance.4. (Main practical reason) I've started printing pretty much exclusively in Platinum, and like to have a picture larger than 8X10.5. The "big production" in setting the thing up works very well with the kind of portraits I'm doing now, elaborate setups often involving costumes or "fantastical" props.6. Finally, I just like using the camera, it suits me, and I rarely think at all about whether I could get "better" results with a different one, or whether my results "justify" using it, something I thought about a lot when I used 4X5. I just like the results I get with this camera, pure and simple. Main pet hate: Shooting verticals is a pain, and often I want to (but then hate myself!) Looking forward to hearing from fellow ULF afficionados. And to all of you thinking of making the plunge: go for it! If it suits you, it's some of the most fun you can have in photography, and a very satisfying extension of the "meditative pace" that draws so many of us to LF to begin with. Nathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 17, 2002 Share Posted June 17, 2002 Did you give up on taking it to Angor Wot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_kasaian1 Posted June 17, 2002 Share Posted June 17, 2002 Nathan, I haven't done much with my ULF pinhole yet, but the "little" 8x10 'dorff and I have had some modest adventures. What I find is really intrigueing for me is the logistics side of the equation---a flashback from a former life in the military I suppose---questions like "how do I get this kit three miles out into the snowy wilderness during the leonid meteor showers to take a timed exosure of an old snag and how do I keep from freezing my tail off in the meantime?" come to mind. The best part is, as George Peppard says in The A Team reruns: "I love it when a plan comes together!" Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathan_congdon Posted June 17, 2002 Author Share Posted June 17, 2002 Bill, the Angkor Wat trip was before I got bitten by the 12X20 bug. I took my 8X10 for that one! Nathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Nathan, I am in awe of your fortitude. However, I guess if they can take IMAX to the top of Mt. Everest, I shouldn't be surprised at what a really dedicated (crazy?) LFer can accomplish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_patti1 Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 I've discovered this really cool device called an "enlarger." It allows you to make big prints from small negatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linas_kudzma Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Nathan, I've only recently moved up to 8x20 with a home built camera that is far from packable. So for now, no long trips abroad with this beast. I admire your determination. I've traveled abroad with my 8x10 and found this a challenge. However, the results were well worth it. I have some 8x10 Platinum prints from these trips that are among my favorites. On a different note, it seems that Chris (in the above sarcastic post) seems to miss the point that this is the LF section and that big negatives are needed for contact printing and no enlarged negative is as beautiful as a pyro or pyrocat developed in-camera ULF negative. This ULF mindset is an aesthetic that some will never appreciate. I'm traveling to Lithuania today and only bringing the 4x5. I know, shame on me. Keep the faith Nathan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_goldfarb Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Kenro Izu travels to all kinds of remote places with a custom-format ULF camera--14x20" if I remember correctly. Lois Connor would be another in 7x17". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_mutmansky1 Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Well Nathan, As you know, I'm sure, the 12x20 makes the 8x10 seem outright easy to travel with by comparison! I do not have sympathy for anyone that complains that an 8x10 is a difficult camera to use in the field. I just don't find that to be the case at all. Some people carry a heavier 35mm system than my 8x10 kit, and I normally carry about 4 lenses, from 210 to 600. It's funny, but using the ULF cameras has rapidly made me a much better photographer. I don't know if it has to do with the 'intimidation' factor of using a $12.00 sheet of film, or whatever, but I have gotten much more contemplative in my process. Much of that can be attributed to the rather laborious procedure to use these large cameras, but ultimately, this has filtered down to the 8x10 and even the 4x5, where I can now set up and shoot a photo much more quickly than I actually want to, and I find myself slowing down to 'think' about the compositon and exposure much more carefully than I used to. I agree about shooting verticals, I do do them occasionally, but they are difficult to do well because of the weight of the camera. I especially like the fact that the ground glass is large enough that you can easily become immersed in the compositional aspects of your environment, and it becomes easier to not look at the composition like a snapshot, where you glance at the subject, and then check the edges for problems, but rather like a painting, where you look at the composition as a whole, and then move in to inspect the details of the subject, and scan the image in parts while you concentrate on the details, ever mindful of the composition as a whole. And then there's the negatives. There's nothing like looking at a 12x20 negative on a light table. For those who have never seen one, you just don't know what you are missing. And then there's the print! There really is nothing like a 12x20 contact print (whether it's platinum or silver). These prints are (again) like paintings, inviting you to look at the composition and then beckoning you closer to discover the details. My biggest complaint about ULF is that the film is so hard to get. Kodak has all but left the field, and our choices for film seem to be dwindling every year. My hope is that Ilford will pick up the standard and carry it proudly for a long time, as they are the biggest company in the US that normally stocks the ULF format. ---Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathan_congdon Posted June 18, 2002 Author Share Posted June 18, 2002 Chris: Call me when your enlarger is finished exposing a platinum print! Be sure to pack plenty of food and water in the darkroom: it's going to take a few months! Seriously, most of the alt processes require contact printing because the emulsions are so slow. To put enough light energy thru your neg to expose via an enlarger would give you the photographic equivalent of a toasted cheese sandwich. But for some of us devoted to ULF, alt process I suspect is really just an excuse for carrying these big cameras around.... Nathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_patti1 Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 My intent was light-hearted. I make silver contact prints and do alt processes (platinum, VDB, cyanotype and POP) myself--albeit with a "minature" 8x10. But to avoid confusion, I will in the future try to remember to add a side-ways smiley face to such posts. Regards, Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_wellman Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 I recently discovered this wonderful site and having a great time. Shooting LF and ULF I often feel alone in the world as the rest of world seems to be shooting 35mm and digital. So, it's great to hear from other ULF's. I use an 8x20 and love the format. I enjoy the wider/narrower perspective. While I shoot (and see) most of shots horizontally I'm trying to see more vertical with it. One of the plus/minus is it's more of challenge to shoot than your standard format, but that's part of the fun. On the minus side is the cost (film, holders, prints, etc) and travelling outside of my car. I have to choose before I hit the trail which format I want--8x10 or 8x20I shoot in ULF because I love contact printing. Prints are second to none. I started off doing Platinium/pallidium, but after discovering Azo a couple of years ago I haven't done much P/P. As for the film, I find it very frustrating that Kodak has given up LF and ULF. I use to shoot TMY, but since Kodak dosen't support ULF I have swithched over to Berrger. They have film for EVERY size and you get great results with pryo. I'm also using Ilford. For those times I'm looking for a little faster film and also try and support them since they havent' forgotten us. I would love to try 16x20 if I could afford the camera and holders, but for now I'll be happy with what I have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now