Please share your 4x5" photos!

My first try with a Crown Graphic, 127mm Linhof, HP5+ @640, Diafine and X1 scan:

15972433477_397266d13c_c.jpg


Yes. I'll try harder and do better as I go along!

Chris
 
Today's effort involved a change of light (south-facing windows plus a kitchen spotlight designed to stop me missing remaining crud on the washing up), my poor, tolerant son, HP5+ @640, Rodinal semi-stand (with some guesswork as I needed more volume but not more development, so 6ml Rodinal in 800ml water for 40 minutes):

16165886502_290a45a6ef_c.jpg


I think I like this!

Chris
 
A couple quick 'n' dusty scans, both of Foma 100.

B&J Press 4x5, SK Angulon 90/6.8.
15993547278_906deec903_c.jpg


B&J Press 4x5, Wollensak Raptar 135/4.7, handheld with the Kalart RF.
16180217732_ce0f527014_c.jpg
 
I have been playing around. My first Graflex Crown Graphic had broken hooks on the Graflok back, and I had to hold the back on with rubber bands. I bought another Crown Graphic from KEH to cannibalise, but it turned out to have a Graphic (or spring) back, not a Graflok. With a set of jeweler's screwdrivers and some determination I swapped the backs, changing the ground glass only focusing screen from the Graphic to the ground glass and fresnel lens from the Graflok in addition to changing the backs. I suspect only someone who has played with these Graflex cameras will be following me at this point! The concern at this stage is that the ground glass surface that used to sit at the same plane that a sheet of film in a film holder would occupy in the donor camera is now displaced by the plexiglass fresnel lens that I have placed under it. Why didn't I think of that before spending hours making a hybrid camera? Shall I take out the fresnel, move it above the ground glass as some recommend? Use the ground glass by itself which is bound to work but will be dark everywhere except the centre, obviating the possibility of using the limited movements offered by Graflex cameras? I decided to try it out and see what happens. I found a Graflok back on the Bay all by itself so I can afford to do an experiment while I wait.
Now just to be difficult, I didn't want to stick with the Linhof 127mm lens that I got with my first Crown Graphic. It equals a 42mm lens in 35mm format terms and I want to do portraits. I have obtained a Rodenstock Apo-Sironar N 210mm lens and ordered a carbon fibre lens board from the Czech Republic to mount it. This should equal a 70mm lens in the tiny format, which was the minimum for portraits that I would choose in my days there. I hate doing experiments with too many variables—don't you? Thinking that a day with no film developed is a day wasted, I went ahead and corralled my poor wife into sitting in the kitchen. I took two photos, one at f16 for increased depth of field in case my fresnel lens added to the Graphic back threw off the focus, and one at f5.6 just in case it didn't. The second turned out to be just fine! Now I have to decide whether to swap to the proper Graflok back or not when it turns up in a week or so—I suspect I shouldn't mess with proper focus! Here it is, HP5+ @400, f5.6, 1/15, Rodinal 6ml in 900ml for 40 minutes semi-stand and a Hasselblad X1 scan:

15627987573_7bd91224fd_c.jpg


Chris
 
First, unless you are cropping to a 2x3 image your focal length conversion is incorrect. Your 127 would be approximately a 31mm in 35mm terms if you were cropping the 35mm to an 8x10 print. And your 210 would be a 52mm.

I am not sure about the spring back, only the very first Pacemaker Graphics had them, and I have never messed with one.
 
I think you're right if everything gets cropped to a 10x8 format. So a portrait tele is going to have to be around 360mm to equal a 90mm lens on a 35mm camera. I don't think those old Graflex bellows will stand up to that, nor are the rails quite long enough! A proper view camera moves a step closer.....

In the meantime, I attempted a SP using the 127mm lens, f16, and the clockwork timer in the Linhof lens's shutter. Neither the focusing nor my ability to stay still for 1/2 second were perfect!

15652864223_49d553e22a_c.jpg


Chris
 
A 4x5 Graphic will take a 360mm telephoto lens, but it will not focus real close.

However, 35mm people tend to think you need a longer lens than you do to get a non-distorted portrait. My old rule was a 135mm for a very tight head shot to a 35mm for a full length portrait. Interestingly that is about 5-feet distance. The thing about that magic 5-feet is that is the distance Northern European people are comfortable conversing from. Closer distances are not comfortable with strangers, too intimate. Other cultures have different values. But the point here is that you want to keep in that kind of range.

In fact, your loose waist up shot is quite comfortable looking with your 127. One of the things you can do easily with 4x5 that you could not do with 35mm is crop your image. You could make your photo a nice head and shoulders and still have about a 6.5x6 image area, for example.

BTW: the classic focal length for 4x5 portraits was 250mm. That size lens is available in both standard and telephoto models, the tele would allow you to focus closer, but would not work well with movements. Everything is a trade off.
 
I'll stick with the 210mm for now, as it seems perfectly good. No one around today, so I ended up pointed at a teapot:

Crown Graphic, Rodenstock Apo-Sironar 210mm/f5.6, HP5+, HC-110 (Dil.B), Hasselblad X1 scan:
16255107116_2d0414000b_c.jpg


Chris
 
Minus 15C today, and a vicious windchill. All the same, I went out with camera and tripod.

Crown Graphic, Schneider 127mm/f4.7 @f16 and 1/250, HP5+, Rodinal stand and X1 scan:
16116978088_db98f0b04c_c.jpg


Chris
 
I was assured I'd make most mistakes sooner or later. I did something really stupid today. I had wanted to try some front movements but there's very little possible on the Crown Graphic, so I flipped the camera on its side to convert its little bit of upward tilt into swing, and then proceeded to swing it the only way it will go, which was the wrong way for the plane of my wife's eyes! The shot taken wide open at 5.6 has only the far eye in focus, but I was saved by f16 in the second:

Crown Graphic, Apo-Sironar 210mm, HP5+, Rodinal, X1 scan:

16309438442_e10f353e6d_c.jpg


The other thing I realise I have to start doing for these closer shots is to add in some bellows compensation. This came out grossly underexposed and had to be tortured a bit in LR.

Chris
 
I have the heavy duty 3D head on my Bogan (Manfrotto) tripod.

It allows me to do some interesting things. For instance in a situation like your portrait of your wife you could use the bottom tripod mount and flip the camera on its side so your swing is in the direction you want it to be. You could also use the side mount to flip the flip the camera upside down and use the up tilt as a down tilt.

Another thing I use it for is with the column upside down in the tripod the camera can be mounted as a copy camera. I usually set it so the camera would be pointed down, mount my ball head on the 3D head then mount the camera on the ball head so I can align the camera exactly with what I am copying. That set up works equally well with my digital cameras.

All in all that tripod head is very versatile.
 
The man in the teapot

The man in the teapot

chrism said:
I'll stick with the 210mm for now, as it seems perfectly good. No one around today, so I ended up pointed at a teapot:

Crown Graphic, Rodenstock Apo-Sironar 210mm/f5.6, HP5+, HC-110 (Dil.B), Hasselblad X1 scan:
16255107116_2d0414000b_c.jpg


Chris
Click to expand...

First let me say it's a nice shot.

Then let me add that it reminds me of the post I once saw, showing an item pictured for eBay. The eBayer had a number of items listed.

One was a chrome tea pot quite similar to this shot. If you looked close at the images on his listing, you could see his reflection in the tea pot. He was NUDE!!!

Watch what you post.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom