Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Frank's selling a shutter? Hm. Perhaps he'll see this and, after chiming in with the fatherly wisdom I *do* (somewhat) take to heart, tell me that he hasn't sold the shutter yet. 😛
Um...large format?
- Thread starter Stephanie Brim
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 37
- Views 2K
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
kaiyen said:
Wonder if I could find a 4x5 back or a Polaroid back for the thing...it would make things cheaper and easier to find, but 5x7 is so damn tempting, really...it's larger than 4x5 but not as large as 8x10...and I can contact print at a 'normal' size.
kaiyen
local man of mystery
I can almost guarantee you that there is no reducing back for that thing. However, that doesn't mean you can't build one. It wouldn't be that hard, in reality. You just need to get the planes right.
5x7 is almost double the size of 4x5. I will grant you that. And I am already extremely pleased with the contact prints I've made, and I've gone to 12x18 on a scan>digital print with mind-blowing results. But it seems like I had to go through a lot of extra effort to get the extra real estate.
If I didn't have the ability to scan 5x7 and make very large digital prints, I would go to 8x10, to be honest.
allan
5x7 is almost double the size of 4x5. I will grant you that. And I am already extremely pleased with the contact prints I've made, and I've gone to 12x18 on a scan>digital print with mind-blowing results. But it seems like I had to go through a lot of extra effort to get the extra real estate.
If I didn't have the ability to scan 5x7 and make very large digital prints, I would go to 8x10, to be honest.
allan
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
Steph,
The learning curve on large format can be pretty expensive with the larger sizes such as 5x7. Here is some free advise which you can promptly disgard as you wish.
1. Buy a box of the cheapest 100 sheets of 5x7 glossy rc paper that you can find.
2. Sacrifice one sheet of 5x7 paper to practise loading into the film holders in the day light.
3. Load the film holders with the rc paper in a dark room with a safe light on.
4. Shoot the film holders with the rc paper at an iso of 3 or 6. With an f stop of f32 and an iso of 3 you will have no need for a shutter. Just use your watch or a timer as the exposure times may run into 2 or 3 minutes.
5. Develop your paper negatives in trays with paper developer.
6. Then, either wet contact print your paper negative onto another piece of rc paper or scan the dried paper negative into your computer and convert the negative into a positive in photo shop.
7. If you find that your contrast is too high in the paper negatives you can pre-flash the paper for 1 to 2 seconds before loading into your film holders.
This will be the cheapest way to make all of the mistakes possible when shooting large format. After you have gone through your 100 sheets of rc paper then you can drop your hard earned bucks on film.
Wayne
The learning curve on large format can be pretty expensive with the larger sizes such as 5x7. Here is some free advise which you can promptly disgard as you wish.
1. Buy a box of the cheapest 100 sheets of 5x7 glossy rc paper that you can find.
2. Sacrifice one sheet of 5x7 paper to practise loading into the film holders in the day light.
3. Load the film holders with the rc paper in a dark room with a safe light on.
4. Shoot the film holders with the rc paper at an iso of 3 or 6. With an f stop of f32 and an iso of 3 you will have no need for a shutter. Just use your watch or a timer as the exposure times may run into 2 or 3 minutes.
5. Develop your paper negatives in trays with paper developer.
6. Then, either wet contact print your paper negative onto another piece of rc paper or scan the dried paper negative into your computer and convert the negative into a positive in photo shop.
7. If you find that your contrast is too high in the paper negatives you can pre-flash the paper for 1 to 2 seconds before loading into your film holders.
This will be the cheapest way to make all of the mistakes possible when shooting large format. After you have gone through your 100 sheets of rc paper then you can drop your hard earned bucks on film.
Wayne
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
That *is* a very good idea, but he's including film. So...yeah...won't be spending money up front on that. I will down the road, though. I *am* going to get some 5x7 paper for contact printing, though. 😀
kaiyen
local man of mystery
Well, with the fomapan 5x7 being like $.60 per sheet it's not so bad to just experiment with that.
allan
allan
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Yeah, I agree. I can get 50 sheets for about what I'd pay for a long roll of Tri-X...I think that's pretty decent. And Fomapan is pretty darn good film from what I've heard...at least in the 100 and 200 speeds. I'm kind of glad this is the format the camera is. We all know that I don't quite like the norm. 😛
XAos
Well-known
You can buy an uncoupled rangefinder for large format cameras at Lowes or Cabelas, depending on just how far inifinity is for your lens.
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Stephanie Brim said:
Extreamly good, IME. I've only used the 100 so far, but I'm shifting to it from Plus-X and not seeing any need to change my techniques. The effective EI in Diafine is somewhere between 200 & 400, so I do need to nail that down better, but other than that, this is a film that I consider to be as good as _anything_ that the big kids make. Ilford films and I just don't get along very well (FP4+ is ok, the rest have been, at best disasters and Delta is just hideous... for me, that is... ) and, well, we all know Kodak is a short timer. Foma is becoming my go to film, I think, as long as it's being made. And it's really nice that Freestyle is rebranding it as Arista.Edu Ultra. Can you say "Silly Cheap!!!!"... Yeah, I knew you could... 😛
I have read that the 100 & 400 are conventional grain films. I know this is the case for the 100 as I see how it reacts in Diafine (Major speed boost from that compensating developer.). I have heard that the 400 should do the same but that the 200 is a modern Tmax type grain. If that is the case then the EI for the 200 will be between 125 and 200 in Diafine. OTOH, D-76 should do right by it if you shoot it straight.
Again, for everything other than their 100, this is what I have read/heard with no hands on. I simply mention it as a datapoint for you to decide what film you want to buy & try. I'm hoping you'll give me some more datapoints to work with... 😱 😀
William
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
As an aside, I was looking at your signature, William, and it reminded me...I was going to say that I wanted a Speed Graphic if I won the lottery. Now I'm thinking that I'll probably end up with a Crown...so my purchase after winning the lottery would most likely be some kind of an 8x10! 😀
I do think I'm being completely nuts...but sometimes you have to shake things up a bit.
I do think I'm being completely nuts...but sometimes you have to shake things up a bit.
W
wlewisiii
Guest
I can understand the appeal of 8x10. But I have to be able to hand hold a camera. That will never happen in 8x10... 😱 Hyperfocal distances for a 127/4.7 and a 45 Graflex make that just a bit easier! Going to have to buy one of those Linhoff grips for my Speed, though, I think... 🙂
Be nuts. We have enough people telling us we're stupid for sticking to silver on celluloid anyway, so why disappoint them? I won't say I always agree with your choices, but, WTF, who ever said I was supposed to? All I know is I need to finish my consulting work this month and find a 28 or 35 or 40 lens for roughly $200 (and then a cheap LTM adaptor for it as well as one for my 90) plus the extra $60 to send that CL to DAG to get the meter happy. Not a whole lot of $$$ in the bigger scheme of things; but enough to make me notice... 🙁 Ain't going to happen, I know, but is that any sillier a hope than some around here?
Edit: Stick to a speed rather than a crown. Yeah, the FP shutter makes it heavier. It also makes glorious, and seriously old, barrel mount lenses much more easily usable... Just see your old plate camera for details... 😀
William
Be nuts. We have enough people telling us we're stupid for sticking to silver on celluloid anyway, so why disappoint them? I won't say I always agree with your choices, but, WTF, who ever said I was supposed to? All I know is I need to finish my consulting work this month and find a 28 or 35 or 40 lens for roughly $200 (and then a cheap LTM adaptor for it as well as one for my 90) plus the extra $60 to send that CL to DAG to get the meter happy. Not a whole lot of $$$ in the bigger scheme of things; but enough to make me notice... 🙁 Ain't going to happen, I know, but is that any sillier a hope than some around here?
Edit: Stick to a speed rather than a crown. Yeah, the FP shutter makes it heavier. It also makes glorious, and seriously old, barrel mount lenses much more easily usable... Just see your old plate camera for details... 😀
William
Last edited by a moderator:
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
A 35 for $200? That could happen. Ever thought of the J-12 or perhaps a Canon f/2.8? If you want to borrow my J-12 for a while, let me know. I'll send it out faster than I sent the J-8. 😛
W
wlewisiii
Guest
I have a J-12 (just look at my avatar. There is a J-12 on the Canon 7 with the 50/1.8 next to it); though I deeply appreciate the offer. It doesn't fit the CL, alas, and that's the body that is driving much of these ruminations. If the good lord is smiling when the money is in hand then a Serenar 35/2.8 I have an eye on will still be available for significantly less than $200. If not, well, I'm no worse off than I am today. And then again there is also this Steinheil Orthostigmat-VL 35/4.5 for $150 that I am aware of. THAT is a serious moment of silliness, yet I am drawn like a moth to that lens... <LOL>
Thank you, very much,
William
Thank you, very much,
William
Last edited by a moderator:
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
It sounds like a really neat lens...what draws you to it?
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Eh? The Ortho? Simply that there is almost _nothing_ on the net about it. I can find people screaming the virtues of elmars, serenars, summarits, nikkors, and so forth until I'm blue in the face. But lenses from Steinheil? Or Topcor? Or any of the of the lower tier, yet real, manufacturers? It's like they fell into a black hole or (bad topical political comment deleted before I was silly enough to postt it... !) and as a result I'm terribly curious about the performance of the lens. Frankly, I expect that it's a Tessar derivative (ala the 35/3.5 Elmar) but at 4.5 it's really easy, technically speaking, to make a good lens.
I'd just like to see what I could do in appropriate light.
William
I'd just like to see what I could do in appropriate light.
William
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Sounds interesting. Kinda like me with the Falcon, actually. 😛
I'm trying to get information on 4x5 backs for 5x7 cameras now...and I've found it may be less expensive to just shoot 5x7 film. 😛
I'm trying to get information on 4x5 backs for 5x7 cameras now...and I've found it may be less expensive to just shoot 5x7 film. 😛
Gordon Coale
Well-known
One option is to get a 4x5 Graflok and make a frame to put it in. A Graflok back will also let you use 120 backs.
http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00005790.htm
http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00005800.htm
http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00005814.htm
http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00005790.htm
http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00005800.htm
http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00005814.htm
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
I just saw those...and yeah, I think I'll ponder that down the line a bit. The 120/220 backs would be really useful. 5x7 film isn't cheap, but it isn't ungodly expensive either...I may stick with that for a bit. I'll still be shooting my smaller formats more.
