Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,235   Posts: 1,659,978   Online: 941
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: 8x20 & 16x20

  1. #11
    mammolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    46

    I went for 14x17

    I am personally moving to 14x17. "Moving" means "I just ordered a 14x17 camera with holders". So I am putting my wallet where my mouth is (oh gosh...)

    The reason I picked 14x17 is five-fold:
    1. Interestingly enough, in the ULF kingdom 14x17 is a standard. Why? Because of X-Ray film. In fact, there is plenty of X-ray orthocromatic film around. Granted, it is not T-Max 400 by a loooooong shot, but if the you-know-what hits the fan and ULF film disappears I can survive on ortho film. There is also some intriguing infrared film in the 820nm range. Nothing to brag about, just some tiny parachute.
    2. The lenses I already have (G-Claron 355mm, Nikkor-C 450mm, Fuji-C 600mm) cover the format nicely.
    3. I started my ULF quest completely sold on 12x20. But then my style evolved and I am no longer shooting solely landscapes. At this point I don't find 12x20 general purpose enough: wonderful for landscapes but somewhat less general purpose than 14x17, and a drag to shoot vertical.
    4. 16x20 was just too much: new lenses, even more weight/bulk, hence money+++++, etc etc. and 11x14 was not big enough. I am shooting 8x10 already, if I make a jump with contact printing in mind it'd better be a JUMP.
    5. My film holders will be able to take 12x16 as well, a popular size in Europe ('popular' is all relative in ULF, of course). Yet another fall-back if film becomes an issue to source: I have two options.

    My one cent (after ordering the camera and the holders I do not even have two cents left)

    P.S. Having said this, I am hanging on the 50 sheets of ADOX 100ISO film I was able to find and put in the freezer. With all the chit chat about Ilford runs, Kodak runs, this will happen and that will happen blah blah blah my bottom line TODAY is that this is the only 14x17 film I was able to find.
    P.P.S. ULF is becoming a game for people with no nervous system, low blood pressure, or hopelessly optimistic.

    Cheers
    Last edited by mammolo; 02-03-2007 at 07:33 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shenadoah Valley
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    342
    Images
    4
    I also find 12x20 to be impractical and hard to compose with and nearly impossible to shoot vertical. Some people are great with the format but I am not. 12x16 and 14x17 are much easier for me to work with and 12x16 is similar to 5x7 proportions and 14x17 much more square. It is a touch more square than 16x20 and I think this could bother some people.

    Ortho film is all I have been shooting in my 14x17 for now, but all i've ran are test images nothing real yet. It is possible to get good images with xray, line or industrial film if you have the technical skills and patience for the slow speed.

  3. #13
    Dave Wooten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Vegas/mysterious mohave co. az, Big Pine Key Fla.
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    2,718
    Images
    20
    Harrigan and Mammolo,
    Nice to hear from other 14 x 17 users!

    Dave in Vegas

  4. #14
    mammolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    46
    Yeah, indeed, nice to hear that I am not alone :-)

    14x17 _is_ squarish, no question about it. I have been shooting for many years with a 6x6 so I am not concerned about it. Clearly, if all one cares are panoramas then it is no good.

    It is close enough to 4x5 though (it would be 14x17.5) that I will be able to go around with my old Linhof viewfinder and figure out whether I want to come back to that spot with my 20 Kg gear ('40 pounds' sounds heavier, I prefer to use kilograms ).

    Cheers!

  5. #15
    Dave Wooten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Vegas/mysterious mohave co. az, Big Pine Key Fla.
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    2,718
    Images
    20
    Also available on line and fresh is 10 x 12, 11 x 14 and 14 x 14 as well as 8 x 10 and 7 x 17 in green and blue sensitivity. Price is quite nice as 100 sheets of 14 x 17 is about 90.00 US for 100 sheets! It would be interesting to hear of and see some "fine art" projects using these films in traditional cameras.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shenadoah Valley
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    342
    Images
    4
    Dave, here is a an image from my civil war battlefield series shot on industrex sr45 film. Cross Keys Battlefield, Harrisonburg VA. This image is older but the series is current. I have not shown many from my series yet. I cant find a spectral curve for the film but 1a safelights are ok with the film. This stuff is slower than mowlassees, less than iso 1 the way I process it! I shot this on full plate but I also have the same film in 14x17. Scanned from the neg and damn good tonality for what I am trying to do w/ these images. Brass wide angle rectalinear lens wide open (f16).

    I dont mean to change this thread however the point is these inexpensive films are very useful for lf and ulf. You dont have to be ultra rich to shoot ULF.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Rev Fuller.jpg  
    Last edited by Harrigan; 02-04-2007 at 07:29 AM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  Ś   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin