Large Format Rangefinder Cameras

G

graywolf

Well-known
Local time
12:00 PM
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
521
Location
USA
View My Gallery
It kind of bugs me. I asked in the Film Pack thread if anyone would be interested in film packs if they were again available. I get answers like, what is a film pack? And a lot of view camera users saying they have no use for film packs.

Probably my fault, I probably should have called them "Press Camera Film Packs", to make it clear I was not talking about Polaroid Film Packs nor Ready Load Sheet Film.

Still, since this is the only forum on the web supposedly dedicated to LF RF's that I know of, and that there are maybe 20 LF View Camera forums, I did think it was an appropriate place to ask about something pertaining to LF RF's. Now I do own and shot a view camera, a Toyo 45G, but I do not post about that in this forum because I consider that off topic and a disservice to others in the forum.

An off topic thread is bad enough, hijacking threads with off topic posts is unconscionable. And probably the reason why these forums seem to be dying.
 
As to press packs, they haven't been around for more than a generation and even then they were being produced for the generation that came before. At this point, the things are obscure relics like saying "Sock it to me!" or "Who loves ya, baby?"

At almost 50 years old, I only know about them because my late father cut his teeth on a Speed Graphic. It's small wonder to me that folks confuse them with polaroid packs because that's the only pack there has been since before the turn of the century.

Would I use them if they were around? Possibly. If they offered something really different from the usual 4x5 film available. For instance, ISO 800 color print film would be fun. Electronic flash doesn't pump-out the light like flash bulbs so another stop wouldn't hurt with DoF when hand-holding 4x5.

Meanwhile, I put Tri-X 320 in my Grafmatics and develop it Diafine when I need people to smile and mug for my camera. They just don't do that for my smaller format cameras, perhaps because I can't hide how ugly I am nearly as well behind little cameras.
 
As a LF users (at about Jason's age it seems), I have never used them, and am only vaguely familiar with Grafmatics, so let me ask this (and please forgive my ignorance, if needed :angel🙂:

Would these Film Packs be (1) preloaded, containers of film to be used (and tossed after use), or (2) more like (what I think) a Grafmatic is?

If (1), I would be very interested since lugging around a bunch of film holders is not fun, so a box with, say, 10 sheets would be awesome! Load them with TMax 100, and I'll buy a subscription 😀

If (2), I might be interested, but some of the original issues with Grafmatics (dust and scratched film) would need to be solved.
 
I have used Tri-X in 16-exposure film packs, 3-1/4 x 4-1/4 size... back about 1965. In a Polaroid 180 camera! To get the Tri-X pack located correctly, one puts it inside a used/empty Polaroid film pack. The paper tab hangs out rather like with Polaroid film, and pulling it moves the exposed sheet around to the back of the pack uncovering the next fresh sheet.
 
I would love to see film packs for lf rangefinders come back. Unfortunately I think you are looking at a very, very small market. Not only does your customer need to shoot 4x5 large format film, they need to want to shoot it like a press photographer from the 30s, 40s and 50s would have. There are only a very few of us who are foolish enough to waste that kind of money shooting large format film like a 6x4.5 medium format. 🙂

I have shot old, expired TriX in 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 inch press packs but I have never been fortunate enough to find it in 4x5.
 
graywolf said:
It kind of bugs me. I asked in the Film Pack thread if anyone would be interested in film packs if they were again available. I get answers like, what is a film pack? And a lot of view camera users saying they have no use for film packs.

So.....it looks like you got your answer, just not the one you were hoping for.

There are a lot of things photographic I'd like to see come back too. But probably just ain't going to happen.
Click to expand...
 
Very strange, my diatribe gets more appropriate answers than my actual thread.

For those who do not know what they are here is a link to my blog:

http://graywolfphoto.com/journal/2015/01/07/continuing-to-tinker/

That article, and the two prior to it are about film packs. I am also trying to edit a video I shot showing how they are used, no idea if I will ever get that done at the rate I am going --probably I would be better off reshooting it.

There were two reasons film packs disappeared: 1-- Press photographers went to smaller formats. 2-- There was a lot of hand work involved in the assembling of them. That second reason was why I was thinking that it might be a possible business for a couple of people who were more interested in earning a wage from it than getting rich. Getting the pieces would not be a major problem if one could sell enough to move the minimum quantities of the film sheets before it went out dated. It would be nothing like the costs involved in reproducing Polaroid film.

At this point, I am thinking I would get more out of shooting off that unopened film pack, than I would opening it up to see exactly what would be needed to reproduce it.
 
Ken Ruth of Bald Mountain, CA made several compact LF RF cameras. I wonder if they could take film packs?
 
graywolf said:
It kind of bugs me. I asked in the Film Pack thread if anyone would be interested in film packs if they were again available. I get answers like, what is a film pack? And a lot of view camera users saying they have no use for film packs.

Probably my fault, I probably should have called them "Press Camera Film Packs", to make it clear I was not talking about Polaroid Film Packs nor Ready Load Sheet Film.

Still, since this is the only forum on the web supposedly dedicated to LF RF's that I know of, and that there are maybe 20 LF View Camera forums, I did think it was an appropriate place to ask about something pertaining to LF RF's. Now I do own and shot a view camera, a Toyo 45G, but I do not post about that in this forum because I consider that off topic and a disservice to others in the forum.

An off topic thread is bad enough, hijacking threads with off topic posts is unconscionable. And probably the reason why these forums seem to be dying.
Click to expand...

When I read your thread, I seem to remember some people voiced bad experience with thinner film that is required due to the film packs mechanism.

How does your solution address this concern? Can we use ordinary 4x5 film readily available today?
 
I use a Technika as my LF rangefinder and this is the first time I've heard of these film packs, so thanks for the education! I have about 50 Fuji FP-3000B film packs in the freezer due to Fuji discontinuing it, to my horror: that's my only experience with pack film.
 
I 've purchased some LF cameras that came with empty film-packs attached, mostly Graflex SLR, if I remember correctly.

If I remember correctly from your other thread on the matter here on RFF, I believe Rich Beckrich, an old-school newspaper photog from Maryland, voiced some comments about pack film and its foibles ( thinner base, flimsy, hard to handle in the darkroon, possible issue with flatness in the camera...)

Again, his comments might not have been the sort of answer you were looking for, but I think shed some light on why pack film went away, aside from the simple economics of declining market for sheet film in general.

When I shoot LF, it's usually with my Pacemaker 4x5, using the RF and VF. (The only time I compose / focus on ground-glass is when I'm shooting view-camera or one of my brass-bound dinosaurs, and generally I'm also using the various camera movements to correct image aberrations, so I'm not in a hurry in these instances. 😱 )

The double-sheet Riteway / Fidelity holders are bulky and clumsy, but in the end probably give a better result than pack film would have.

I think the appeal of pack-film for working photogs "back in the day" was convenience in loading / speed of shooting, which would have been important to press / sports photographers, whose images were most likely going to be converted into dot-matrix wire-photos for publication, so perfect flatness probably wasn't a prime need over "getting the shot".

I think your biggest technical challenge is going to be finding a film-stock with a thin-enough base. If a film manufacturer currently produces film on a thin-enough base, perhaps you could convince them to cut it in 4" widths ?

2-1/4" width for the 2x3 Graphic / Graflex might be easier to obtain in bulk , since 120 films are 2-1/4" wide... don't know how thick the base stock is...

Once you have a supply of film, then it's just a matter of getting someone to make the pack body, and assemble it.

Personally, I don't shoot enough LF to see myself needing pack-film... if I'm in a hurry, I'm either going to use the 2x3 Century with a roll-film back, or Grafmatic on the Pacemaker...

I hope I haven't strayed too far form the topic ?

Best regards,

Luddite Frank
 
Let's talk about film for a bit. The film in the film packs, by all unbiased reports, was the same stuff as in 120 roll film. Yes it is thinner than regular sheet film. The 16 exposure packs had super thin stock in them, but I doubt that would be available today.

As to all those faults the stuff supposedly had, they only sold it for 80 years or so. First sold in 1906 an last made in the late 1980's with a use by date of 92~93. Hardly seems like something that defective would have sold for that long.
I will be developing a 12 exposure pack of Tri X Pan (not Professional) soon, and will undoubtedly post a report about that experience on my blog. The last time I used film packs was back in the 1960's (about the same vintage as the stuff I have to play with at the moment), but I do not remember all those problems with it.
 
Special sizes: Back in the day someone inquired about special sizes of film from Kodak. The answer they got was the Kodak was willing to cut it to that size but they would have to buy a whole production roll of film. I seem to recall that was 40" x 500'. I think most of the current film producers are using smaller machines than that, something like 24". I have a vaguish recollection that the sheets were actually something like 105mm x 135mm a bit larger than 4x5 sheet film, but 105mm was once a standard roll film width.

Now that 24" x 500' is still a lot of film. But would only be about 500-600 film packs. If there was a market for that much worldwide, it would be a viable product. If not, it would not be.
 
Like I said earlier, I have shot TriX in 16 count Kodak film packs relatively recently. Although old it developed fine. It was in 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 inch film so not a lot different than regular 120 roll film. I am sure you could probably build these types of film packs with current film stock. However, a 120 roll film back is arguably easier to use, and currently available.

So, I would think that you would want to build these in 4x5 to provide something different. Current 4x5 is fairly thick, so how tight a turn radius are you going to be able to get away with? Not having having tested this I would only be guessing, but I don't believe that the tight curve required by 16 sheet film packs is even possible.

The next problem are the holders themselves. Old holders for the Graflock can be found but I would think you would be further ahead building your own rather than rely on a dwindling supply of the old holders. But, I could be wrong here since I am not searching for them nor evaluating their present condition (rust, felt, etc.)
 
I suspect one important reason why it's hard to drum up much interest in film packs - apart from the fact that they're plainly not coming back - is that people who would be inclined to use them are generally satisfied with Grafmatics or bag mags, which can still be had in usable condition.

Even Grafmatics and bag mags have their foibles, though, and I've never been inclined to mess with them myself. My volume of sheet film exposures is low enough that standard cut film holders are fine.
 
A few years ago, there was a company that sold reusable large format film pack sleeves.
Roger Hicks probably remembers the Shutterbug article.
 
Pioneer said:
I would love to see film packs for lf rangefinders come back. Unfortunately I think you are looking at a very, very small market. Not only does your customer need to shoot 4x5 large format film, they need to want to shoot it like a press photographer from the 30s, 40s and 50s would have. There are only a very few of us who are foolish enough to waste that kind of money shooting large format film like a 6x4.5 medium format. 🙂

I have shot old, expired TriX in 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 inch press packs but I have never been fortunate enough to find it in 4x5.
Click to expand...
If that large! I've never heard anyone with a good word for them. Also, I strongly suspect that quarter-plate (3-1/4 x 4-1/4 inch) was more common than 4x5 inch. The very thin films are apparently a bar steward to develop: I'd back Grafmatics and real film every time.

I have an apparently unused quarter-plate film pack in front of me as I write: Tri-X Pan Professional. As far as I can see it works pretty much like a Polaroid film pack: pull a black tab, flexi film goes into window on front, then to back.

There were a couple of variants on the Grafmatic -- one from Fuji, one from someone else, I think -- as well as several varieties of single-sheet systems, whether with Polaroid or specialist holders. There was also a sort of super-thin conventional blockform holder that was put into a thicker adapter to get the register right. I did at least one article about these in the British Journal of Photography some 20-30 years ago. Maybe Shutterbug too. For that matter, I remember an auto-change multi-exposure back for 4x5 inch at Photokina, perhaps from Schneider. It was huge and expensive; suitable only for studio use (if that); and I don't think it ever went into production.

You put your finger on the basic question, though: how many people, indeed, are crazy enough to want such things nowadays? There's probably more demand for wet plate.

Cheers,

R.
 
rlouzan said:
A few years ago, there was a company that sold reusable large format film pack sleeves.
Roger Hicks probably remembers the Shutterbug article.
Click to expand...

The Mido sleeves?

It's interesting how expensive they are when sold used. You still have to manually load them so I personally don't see the the advantage. Yes, marginal space/weight saving depending on how many you bring, but...well not worth it for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
A (possibly) unusual question about out-of-date film...
Replies
8
Views
713
Freakscene
Freakscene
laptoprob
SilverStax
Replies
10
Views
742
laptoprob
laptoprob
ped
Aires 35-IIIc rangefinder
2
Replies
25
Views
703
rick oleson
rick oleson
B
Contaflex Super BC loose optical mount
Replies
0
Views
312
BernardL
B
J
  • Article Article
What's happening with Photographic Film in 2025? Is this robust niche still growing?
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
10K
Erik van Straten
Erik van Straten
Back
Top Bottom