Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,817   Posts: 1,581,637   Online: 831
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Sanity Check

  1. #11
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    123
    you'll all just buy it back later and lose money
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  2. #12
    ronlamarsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Seattle Wash
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    462
    Images
    16
    Thanks to all for the sound and thoughtful advice
    No escaping it!
    I must step on fallen leaves
    to take this path

  3. #13
    Axle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Milton, ON
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    447
    Keep one 4x5, if you sell them all, it may seem like a good idea for about a month. Then you'll want one back. Then get a nice 120 camera, maybe a TLR, something like a Mamyia C series, they have interchangeable lenses.
    Canadian Correspondent for the Film Photography Podcast
    A bi-monthly podcast for people who love to shoot film!

  4. #14
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    My experience: MF doesn't save you that much space. At all.

    I started with MF (Pentax 6x7) and later on added a Super Graphic. The SG, folded up, is not too much larger than the P6x7. The lens stays on the SG when it folds, so no problem there. I develop with either a tray or a Jobo in my bathroom. My enlarger is on a cart I built for it, and stuff stows away inside the cart. (I've posted a picture in the sticky "improvised darkroom" thread.)

    I'm guessing here that the biggest loss is the darkroom. You can still have an optical setup, and it takes about 30 minutes for setup or teardown. It takes about the same amount of effort to develop LF film as it does MF film, so no savings there. And if you use LF film, you'll have better quality in the other workflow.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    san jose, ca
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,564
    Images
    77
    Not getting too deep into it... but I think you are crazy.
    If you are together enough to be shooting LF or MF photography, why in the world would you give up a house with a darkroom?
    Of course, it's none of my business. Take my photography from me with my last dying breath.

    tim in san jose
    Where ever you are, there you be.

  6. #16
    LJH
    LJH is online now

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    607
    I'd either keep the 4x5 (sell the 5x7; film's too much of a PITA to get), or get a top line digital DLSR.

    Darkroom's going to be the big space consumer (even if it's a portable style as storage will be needed), so a 'Blad isn't going to save much room. Removing the darkroom by getting a digital will save you heaps of room.

    You will, however, need a big shower. Using digital will leave you feeling very, very dirty...

  7. #17
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vic., Australia.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,681
    Images
    15
    A Hassy and a scanner is a brilliant idea! Given there is so little variety of film for large format, that alone was sufficient to p*** me off taking it into my fold...

    Scanning the negs might be a little more involved: lots of stuff to learn, preparation, profiling/colourimetrics, proofing, localisation work... and finding a pro-level printer who acts as your second (or third???) pair of eyes and a sharpened mind for the print you want. You do need a lot of room, and a methodical workflow, for a scanner: you need a work area to view, vet, cut, mask, sort, label, assemble and eventually scan. Then there's the box of binary bits to take it all in. And somewhere for the wife to sit to tap you on the shoulder to remind you, "dinner's ready in 5 minutes"...

    What's with the artists' space you want to rent? A Hassy can fit in a shoebox! Or at the least, a small room. What are you into?



    LJH
    [...] "or get a top line digital DLSR."


    Blasphemy! Off wif his head!
    “The photographer must determine how he wants the finished print to look before he exposes the negative.
    Before releasing the shutter, he must seek 'the flame of recognition,' a sense that the picture would reveal
    the greater mystery of things...more clearly than the eyes see."
    ~Edward Weston, 1922.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,286
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    A Hassy and a scanner is a brilliant idea! Given there is so little variety of film for large format, that alone was sufficient to p*** me off taking it into my fold...

    Scanning the negs might be a little more involved: lots of stuff to learn, preparation, profiling/colourimetrics, proofing, localisation work... and finding a pro-level printer who acts as your second (or third???) pair of eyes and a sharpened mind for the print you want.
    Agreed, and while it's off-topic for APUG, digital post is a very substantial set of skills that takes time and effort to learn to do well, just like darkroom work is. Well worth considering, but I'm glad to see someone not waving it off as "aw, that part is easy".

    Anyway, don't write off the beauty of the medium-format contact print. 6x6 used to be a perfectly normal print size, and you occasionally find old frames designed for it (well, you find new frames in that size too, but they're cheap novelty crap sold at the craft store for the most part). Obviously a print that size is meant for intimate viewing, in hand or on a desk rather than on a gallery wall---I kind of like that aspect, personally. It's cheap because you're using such small amounts of paper, you can do it in small trays in the same micro-darkroom you use for tank development, and it keeps your analog-workflow chops up.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  9. #19
    Joe VanCleave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    488
    If it were I (and I do already live in an overcrowded small house) I'd keep the LF gear, at least one set, and get into contact prints, Harman Direct Positive Paper and/or paper negatives. If you don't contact print, you really don't need any darkroom space at all, just a changing bag and developing tank to process paper or film in your kitchen. A scanner connected to your PC/Mac shouldn't take up that much extra space.

    With MF film, if you want silver prints, you're going to need a darkroom space and enlarger, whereas even for contact print from 4x5 you don't need the enlarger, just the darkroom space (convertible bathroom, perhaps). So the LF might save you space.

    Ideally, you should have a 5x7 kit and do contact prints. Just a convertible bathroom/darkroom, a few processing supplies, no enlarger needed.

    ~Joe

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,793
    The grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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