Im seriously considering *gulp* large format.

[Messiah Khan]

Following my 'enlightenment' that I really need film, medium format and large format experience under my belt for by career ambitions I am seriously considering getting a basic LF setup. I have looked for courses to give me experience, but there seems to be a distinct lack of suitable ones, and once you pay for them, with my logic, you might as well have bought one youself and donw lots of reading and playing.

So from anyone who uses or has used large format cameras, any tips or suggestions would be greatly welcome. After a bit of basic research, I think im leaning towards something like a Sinar F2. I realise that a monorail would be harder to use and carry out in the field, but im trying to find a balance between usability for my own work, and getting experience with the sort of equipment a studio would use (Which is the primary goal here). Would this be a good choice?

Say I get one of these, what is going to be the best and easiest way to create a final image? Ive been offered the chance to be given a full set of darkroom kit, but its unlikely the enlarger well take 5x4, and even if it did i've got nowhere to set up a darkroom. So what is the easiest and cheapest way to develop the negative, then scan it in? Also are there any good guides to how contact printing works? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Helium_Junkie]

I think you've made a good choice - get out there and give it a go then see if you still think you need a course.
Good luck with it

 

[ElDude]

Blimey. Not sure you'll get many responses about actual use in that area, on these boards. I have to admit I'm curious as hell about your venture. I hope you keep us posted.

I can honestly say this is probably the most interesting thread I've read on here in ages!

I think we can all use you for tips, links and ideas if you do get seriously into this

I've just had a quick google and there isn't a great deal of info immediately available. The Beslar 50mm lens seems to get mentioned a lot. I've no idea about anything in this area though

 

[Johnny|lucidcomposure]

I wouldn't bother at this stage. I think medium format is more for you for the reason as you previously mentioned (portability)

 

[SDK^]

I'm guessing this was the feedback from your interview?

 

[Bluelion]

I'm very interested to know why you believe you need large format MK. I presume this is for studio work rather than your wildlife pursuits? I would expected the costs of LF to be so astronimical its out of the reach of mere mortals?

 

[Aod]

old large format gear can be had second hand at very respectable prices. i think that a full large format setup with a few lenses and film cartriges can be had for about £1500 or so.

<edit> large format lenses now are exactly the same as large format lenses 50 years ago!

 

[ChroniC]

Having been forced to use large format i would say try it if you can, but dont bother spending out for it. No one uses it, its a fiddly and tiresome experience, and the film is £30 for 10 sheets.
Studios do not use LF, all the ones ive worked for or visited are medium format or digital now. Id have to echo the thoughts of others and say why bother, go medium. Much more enjoyable.
However i will give you what i know about it and how to use the principles.

For anyone interested.
At uni we have 2 types, the cambo rail 4x5 and the Toyo-Field 45AII. The Toyo is my prefered choice, its built like a tank, and folds away small, its an excellent field camera for those reasons but obviously its damn expensive, i think the body alone is over a grand, and lenses are not cheap. large formats excellent resolution does come at a cost, a box of kodak portra 160nc is £30 for 10 sheets, the darkslides are about £20 each and you need a few. Loading the film requires a dark loading room.
The slides open at the bottom and the film has braille like cuts in the edge so you an position the film accordingly, one each side of the slide.
The camera works in its static position like a pinhole camera. The lens has all the mechanics for the aperture and the shutter timing on it. On the back, the lens projects an image upside down onto a glass grid, set up in this standard format the darkslide slides over the back of the glass and you set the correct aperture and shutter speed by dials on the lens.
This requires a lightmeter to get the correct exposure, and a hood as you cannot see the picture on the glass without near darkness, it also in most cases requires a small magnifier to get the focus perfect as the image is very difficult to see.
Once set up releasing the front from the slide, and pressing the button on the front is as difficult as it gets, then you have to know by a black and white colour system, which side of the slide has been exposed. Exposed slides need to be selotaped for security and placed in a dark bag.

If people dont know about LF they have probably never encountered the amount of dials that are on the camera. The dials on the front and back are pretty standard, but this might become a bit confusing have you never seen a LF camera. It has a front plate which the lens attaches to, this has two rails to allow it to slide up and down. The distance of the front and back plate allows focusing, but entension of the belows can have effect on your exposure timings, and as such it has a ruler system on the side to allow calculation. The difficult bit comes into play when you release the catches on the side that allow the front and back plate to tilt independantly of each other. I understand the scheimpflug principle that tilting these plates creates but it is damn hard to put into practice, needess to say if i tried to explain it to you it would be to confusing without the camera or a picture as an example.

You can get the film developed at specialist shops, you might find you have a dedicated old fashioned style store that do this. There is one in southampton, but i dont think its a major chain of stores, im sure there is probably one in most major cities. You can also get large format holders for enlarger machines, but in most cases the highest the projector will go is limiting the size you can print. The largest i have ever printed is 20x24, and 50 sheets of paper cost me £70, this leaves you 2 choices, make your own dark room, buy a 200quid enlarger, and lots of paper, then you need processing chemicals, frankly you would be nuts unless you dedicate a entire room in your house, and spend thousands.
I have never had LF printed privately.

Its cost is effectively the thing that stops me using it at all, i cannot afford to spend hundreds on 10shots, and with the effort that has to go into each shot if they dont come out, its pretty down-heartening.
It begs the question, is the til shift principle something you really want to incorporate into your art? Is the cost going to be a benefit, and can you afford the processing and printing cost, if you want to avoid scanning. Digital prints will never really be good enough imo.

If you want to know anything about printing then add my msn, i can explain all the casting and what you will need.

 

[Messiah Khan]

I wouldn't bother at this stage. I think medium format is more for you for the reason as you previously mentioned (portability)

I want to play with MF as well evantually, but I don't like doing things by half measures and I feel jumping in at the deep end with LF first will make me learn faster than doing it the other way round.

I'm guessing this was the feedback from your interview?

Yup. I was shot down within the first 5 minutes due to not having MF or LF experience. Somewhat annoyed at how the interview was conducted, but it has pointed out some glaring gaps in my experience/knowledge. I need MF, LF and Film experience.

I'm very interested to know why you believe you need large format MK. I presume this is for studio work rather than your wildlife pursuits? I would expected the costs of LF to be so astronimical its out of the reach of mere mortals?

For my own persoanl stuff it will be for Landscapes as well as more commercial stuff like food photography, still life etc. But its mainly for the education (see above) so I know the inner workings of LF, not only from a theoretical point of view, but from practical experience as well. Although more expensive than Digital, 35mm or MF it isn't actually that silly expensive. Obviously im not going to be rattling off 40,000+ shots a year like im doing with Digital, but its still quite workable if I slow down, concentrate and get the keeper rate up.

old large format gear can be had second hand at very respectable prices. i think that a full large format setup with a few lenses and film cartriges can be had for about £1500 or so.

<edit> large format lenses now are exactly the same as large format lenses 50 years ago!

Looking around I should be able to pick it up even cheaper than that. (<£500) I can get any development kit I need for free, but im probably going to get it developed professionally to start with, then try developing my own negatives and scanning them in.

Studios do not use LF, all the ones ive worked for or visited are medium format or digital now. Id have to echo the thoughts of others and say why bother, go medium. Much more enjoyable.
However i will give you what i know about it and how to use the principles.

Oh yes they do. the main reason im considering doing this jump now (I always intended to do it at some point, but not yet) is because I had an interview for a studio job, but failed miserably because I had no MF or LF experience. A decent amount of commercial photographers such as food photographers still use LF, often with a digital back. Obviously I can't afford a digital back to go with it, but I can fill the gaps in my MF, LF and film knowledge. Im still keeping an eye out for Phase one/ Leaf courses as well.

 

[EnglishMack]

I use LF quite a lot, whoever it was that said no one uses Large Format any more is wrong. It is used a lot in the studio for specialist portraiture, it is (still) the main camera used by architectural photographers, they are also often used for high end product advertising, too. Shame I only just saw this thread because I sold a whole bunch of unused LF equipment like dark slides and cable releases..

Developing sheet film is a lot easier than developing roll film, if you plan on using it a lot and you drive (only for ease of transport), especially with landscape photography, you won't regret investing in the kit. The same kit will still work and produce second to none results in 20 years time if you look after it.

I've recently been using a Hasselblad with a CFV digital back and its the best kit I've ever used. I can't really offer you any advice on LF other than the basics of setting up, shooting and developing. I wouldn't be able to recommend you what kit to buy.

 

[Messiah Khan]

Thanks EnglishMack. As usual when researching a potential new toy, I really am in two minds about this. I really could do with the kit to learn, and it sure would be fun and challenging, but the little angel on my shoulder is saying "No you fool, save your money!". Damn you little angel, spending is much more fun!

I don't drive, but transporting it shouldn't be too much of a problem as I regulary carry 17Kg of kit at the moment anyway. The idea of a Lf camera doesn't worry me too much and im pretty sure id pick it up fairly fast. The bit that does scare me a little though is the film and developing part. Im a complete film virgin (Again something that I really need to learn) and the way I see it I have 3 solutions; Send the film (Probably 5x4) off to a professional developer and get negatives back. Just entirely Polaroids. Or (And I think this is possibly the best solution) use some sort of simple process to develop the negatives, then scan them in to the computer.

Any tips for simple developing and scanning? Would you recommend any B&W film? Is developing colour much harder? Also have I missed anything out from the shopping list;

LF camera (Front and rear standards, bellows, wide angle bellow bag, rail, ground glass, freshnel screen(Is this essential?), black cloth)
Lens, shutter, shutter release and lensboard (Will probably go with something like a normal 150mm to start off with)
Darkslides
Film

Its like a whole new world this lot, but its quite fun going outside my comfort zone. What do you shoot on LF btw EnglishMack? Do you use it professionally?

 

[ChroniC]

B&W processing is fairly simple, it only really requires 2 chemicals, developer+water (at 20c) then fixer. Some shaking in between and your done. We were not allowed to develop our own colour negs, as it required noxious chemicals, and boiling temps, and as such on one occassion our wing was evacuated because the chemicals got spilled. Its probably not much harder but require some sort of dedicated area at least.

 

[Fr0dders]

Thanks EnglishMack. As usual when researching a potential new toy, I really am in two minds about this. I really could do with the kit to learn, and it sure would be fun and challenging, but the little angel on my shoulder is saying "No you fool, save your money!". Damn you little angel, spending is much more fun!

cant help but think that the studio who interviewed you are being a bit short sighted. Why are they asking for experience on stuff thats becomming gradually obsolete. All the professional photo shoots ive seen ( mostly glamour / fashion / models etc..) have been digital.

Cant see the point in learning a format thats on its way out. Would it not be better to get a job with a studio thats not bothered about this type of kit, as come 10 years time, its going to have become even more pointless.

 

[ElDude]

That's very short sighted as a lot still use it, and probably will for years to come. All you'd be doing with that attitude is stopping yourself from getting work now, or at least limiting it. Okay, you'll be fine in 20-30 years when no one uses it, but for the minute anyone would have a better portfolio for learning a wide range of things. A company has a better employee that can do a wide range of things, so doesn't have to hire others when they have one that can do most things.

If you read any interviews with professional photographers, they all use at the very minimum, film camera, digital cameras and medium format. Most of the better knows photographers still stick with film in the most part.

 

[Mohain]

Any tips for simple developing and scanning? Would you recommend any B&W film? Is developing colour much harder? Also have I missed anything out from the shopping list;

One thing I'd add to your shopping list is a decent lupe for focusing. Also what about filters? Polaroid backs?

TBH if you dont drive I think you'd find it far too much hass. A bag full of darkslides alone is pretty bulky let alone the size of tripod you'll need!

Developing B&W at home is much much easier than developing colour. With B&W you can get away with murder. I've even seen recipes for using instant coffee as a developer! Colour needs much more accuracy. Having even 0.5C difference in developer temperature will make all the difference, although you can buy kits to regulate chemical temps.

Scanning ... hmmmm. Dunno if I'd just want to use just a £400 Epson to scan my beautiful 5x4 film ...

If you want LF experience you might be better off trying to get some free 'work experience' in your local studio. Even with the time off work it'd almost certainly be cheaper in the long run. To start from scratch in LF will cost you a bomb, even though the kit is relatively cheap now.

 

[Fr0dders]

That's very short sighted as a lot still use it, and probably will for years to come. .

like i said, in what limited expsoure ive had to the industry, most seemed digital. If thats different from the reality thats fine. Im not pretending to know, just cant see why so film still persists.

 

[Johnny|lucidcomposure]

Are you a complete virgin to film processing?
If so then I would highly recomend getting comfy with 35mm first since you don't want to be making errors on this expensive LF material. Theres a lot that can go wrong with film processing and its important that you get into a rhythm that becomes second nature to you.. I have no doubt large format will come easy to you but you really wanna master the basics.

 

[9designs2]

An interesting thread, very thought provoking. Ok I never used LF and only played a little with MF. But I grew up and learnt my photograph from 13 years onwards in a darkroom and B&W, so for me it's second nature to do.

I still use 35mm, simply because to me it feels more real.... Though it is very time consuming...... and the 5D has to be exercised
MK, having been always impressed with your work, and obviously you are very dedicated and enthusiastic, I'd say you have little choice ... You got to get your fingers wet and smelly.
To my mind your first priority is sort a home darkroom out, sending stuff away defeats the object. There is some much to learn and enjoy in the darkoom.
it is a completely different world. One that I think will drive you mad, but you will love !
So, I'd go 35mm Black and White, to get sorted in the Film frame of mind. Then later pick up MF set up.... A Bronica ETRSI is real cheap, very manual, and great to learn the craft..... Can't remember how many times I nearly hit the buy now option one or a Contax 645 !

Then see if you find a copy of Darkroom printing by Gene Nocon. He "invented" a method of working not normally taught, the "f stop method"... ... it makes printing so much more predictable.

Bit of searching on the bay, should get a darkroom, enlarger and some camera kit for real low prices.
Don't think you need to go OTT to learn and understand the "old school".... but should give you a new view on your digital photograph.....

For colour it's easier to have it developed and then scan, printing colour in a darkroom is really pointless these days to my mind. It's to limiting in what you can do.
Shoot colour slide and process the film yourself for scanning is not difficult, process temps are up at 38C (20-24 in B&W) and affordable chemical kits can be had.

So a roll of FP4 and some ID11 and your away....

 

[Alex53]

A member of my photography club (Gibraltar Photographic Society) who I have had many chats with about gear has tried everything, 35mm film, digital, medium format, panoramic 6x17 with LF lenses, and now LF view cameras.

He is a landscape photographer and he goes for maximum quality and detail, and well as being able to modify the focusing plane to maximise apparent depth of field. He mostly sells his work in person (I know a few offices and restaurants that display it) but also prints through his site. That said he is very pragmatic about the gear he uses, in fact he just bought a Nikon D300 for a particular job (which I guess he will sell on soon).

I believe he sends the film to be developed to a lab in the UK. He then he has his own high quality scanner and inkjet printer (the ones the take wide rolls). He's told me it costs him about £8 each time he takes a shot.

I find a lot of his work quite awesome. (http://www.charliecruzlandscapes.com/)

I once considered this same path. What I did, and recommend you do is that you get a 35mm body in the mount you already use for digital, so that you have lenses to use straight away. Practise shooting film and see how you get along with the workflow. Find a lab to send the film to be developed, and practice scanning it and processing/printing digitally.

The biggest layout here will be a decent scanner. I'd save on the body and put it towards the scanner. Since quality-wise all 35mm film bodies will be the same, go for a no frills jobbie. Auction sites are full of them.

If you do find the film workflow works for you, go for it and get MF or LF. For me it didnt. I simply stopped shooting so much, had no lab nearby, and just didnt have the urge to work that way.

So I changed my mind and started saving up for a full frame digital camera, which I have found to be the right compromise between quality and convenient workflow for me. But I do know that condemns me to never produce the sheer level of detail and quality that he produces, however inspired I might be in composing my shots.