jos__garese

Hi, Butch. As Scott, I am interested in floral still life, but also -and especially- in macro floral still life, so I found your reply most engaging. I have just visited your website. Congratulations for your body of work: some of the pictures are really beautiful. On this subject, I have had some valuable input from Pete Andrews on the past, but nevertheless I would now like to consult the opinion of someone who really works on this specific subject. I don't do 8x10 but 4x5, but I guess the principles are the same. When doing macro work, do you suggest using a specialized macro lens vs. a reversed enlarger lens? would you say that a macro lens with a magnification range of 1:4 to 4:1 would more or less cover one's needs in terms of floral still lifes? would you also suggest using a view camera (where you can focus with the gg) vs. a field camera (where you cannot)? Those are my questions. But any other related input will be most welcome.

Harvey Shaman's book is what they recommend for beginners in LF at the ICP (International Center of Photography). That's "The View Camera", by Harvey Shaman. I would start with that. Everything is explained very clearly, step by step. And there's quite a lot to learn from it... Only then, when you get more proficient, and have got used to your camera and to taking pictures with it, would I suggest exploring Ansel Adams and or Fred Pickers books.

A good guide for this kind of work is John Sexton's "LISTEN TO THE TREES". The subject is, precisely, forests. The image quality (black & white, mostly T-Max 100) is outstanding. And the book features an appendix where, uncommonly, the author goes into detail over lens, film, filter, diaphragm, time exposure and n-factor used in each of his photographs -all of this provided in a chart.

thanx again. your new reply has been most helpful. going back to a previous concern, I have finally come to think that a mono-rail with a groundglass that I can move forward or back will work much better than the wista (for this macro work). the "micro-tuning" of the focus, at such minimal depths of field, becomes essential, and will be better achieved with the mono-rail, where there's no need of moving back or forward the whole camera & tripod when getting closer of/further from the object is desired.

thanks a lot, pete. (for anyone else into macro photography with LF, you can find much more on the subject in the files under TECHNIQUE.) just one more question: you talk about reasonable quality with a reversed enlarger lens. I'm interested in doing large scale fine art prints. so quality is a must (I'm thinking about 40x50 inches and up) how reasonable would you say the results from this method would be?? I mean: one of the reasons I have jumped onto LF, is to achieve maximum quality, sharpness, rendition. otherwise I would have stayed with Leica and I would try to get a second hand 100 APO/macro2.8 would you say there is a real jump, then, from one to the other, that is from top-notch 35mm to LF with reversed lenses?

I would like to photograph objects as tiny as the cap of a 35mm canister and even a little tinier, while more or less covering the whole area of my 4x5 neg. is that possible? what combination of lens and bellows would be needed? my camera is a field wista dx. I have seen that there are a 300mm and a 600mm extension bellows for it, plus a tele macro bench. anyone thinks these (expensive) items would be adequate for my aims? or would a monorail camera -with the possibility of groundglass forward and backwards adjustments- be better, and if so, for example which one and (again) with which lens & bellows extension?