Where does 35mm half-frame fit into the mix? Is it miniature or sub miniature?
I know that 4x5 inch is considered large format these days. However, if my memory serves me right, 4x5 at one time was considered medium format. When did that change and why did that change?
That's why you wear a woolly hat in the winter
Originally Posted by JPD
1/2 35mm belongs to small format as far as I am concerened as it uses regular 35mm film.
4x5 became LF probably with the rising popularity of 35mm that became a kind of new standard when the pro's started to work with it on a regular basis.
In Europe some find 8x10 extreme, read ULF, while in the US it belongs to LF for shure.
127 belongs to MF because it uses paper backed rolfilm as 120/220.
126 and 828 (Bantam) with their paper backing belong to small format however and the paper backed 110 belongs to (sub)miniature to make things easy.
Sometimes the dividing lines are not that B&W but more grey-ish.
And there is a personal thing in this aswell: for some 35mm belongs to miniature when they work with their beautifull wooden 8x20's .......
127 is woolly, most books from the 30's & 40's refer to it as miniature film, but then many books from that era call 120 miniature format too
126 is just a revamp of 828, making the awkward roll film more user friendly. Half frame is still miniature, although it's frame size is more akin to sub-miniature. . . . . . .
When you look at older books etc miniature formats were the smaller portable usualy roll film cameras, and large format were the plate cameras, but there was some cross over. Then Miniature became sub-divided into Medium Format & small with the rising popularity of 35mm.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Originally Posted by archphoto
Peter, thank you for your comment; you stirred an old memory.
The comment about "half frame 35 mm format" is interesting. While we still camera photographers think of the "standard format" for 35 mm film as being 24 mm high and 36 mm wide, the original users of that film, the motion picture guys (cinematographers?), considered the "standard format" for that film to be 18 mm high and 24 mm wide. When Herr Barnack came out with his miniature camera that used 35 mm wide film appropriated from the motion picture industry, he used a "double frame" format of 36 mm by 24 mm.
The format ratio of 3 by 4 for the original motion picture frame is another difference in comparison with the 2 by 3 format ratio of our still camera negatives.
Yes, the categories into which these film sizes have been placed do seem to have shifted around a bit over time, as has our labels for them.
Ralph Javins, Latte Land, Washington
When they ask you; "How many Mega Pixels you got in your camera?"
just tell them; "I use activated silver bromide crystals tor my image storage media."
I definitely agree that it depends on the photographer. For one who contact prints with an 11x14, 4x5 becomes very small and manageable. I guess it's all perspective.
I personally would say that 127 is right between 35mm and medium format....
Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time
Minature format 16mm, 9mm (and 110 Instamatic?)
Small format: 35mm (and I suppose the old 828 roll film and 126 instamatic cartridge)
Medium format: (most) any roll film
Large format: any sheet film and aerial roll film
I don't know you can classify 'medium format' by size. A Century Graphic loaded with 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 sheet film is usually considered LF, though when loaded with 120 film of the same negative size it would be MF. A Mamiya Press/23/Universal is MF with or without a sheet film back. An old Kodak folder taking 112 (?) film with a 3 1/2 x 5 1/2 negative size is considered MF.
127 has been very popular in the past and within 127 you had several formats like 4x4, 4x3 and some other odd sizes.
They were generaly smaller than the 120's and were amateur camera's.
Kodak made quite a few camera's and Rollei had their 4x4 in grey and later in black.
Putting a stamp on a camera is sometimes dificult and the "stamp" depends again on the starting point.
If you go by film size you would have Minox, 16mm, 110, 126, Bantam, 135/APS, 127, 120/220 and the 6xx formats, the 116/616, sheetfilm and plate camera's.
And the diskformat made in at least two diferent periods.
On the other hand you can make a devision in box, folder, RF, SLR, TLR, field, TC, panoramic, stereo and so on.
And you have your cross-overs aswell: a Nikon F is a SLR, but a Hassie too.
Maybe that is what makes camera collecting so interesting.
35mm motion picture film was the first film used in still camera's, in the 70's there were quite a few 16mm still camera's by Minolta, Edixa and many others to cater for a market that wanted smaller camera's.
110 was a time popular untill the people that used them found the limitations of the film size and inherent grain and went to the next generation of temporairy formats, despite camera's like the Asahi Pentax SLR 110.
Back in the 70's I predicted that a few formats would survive: 135, 120/220 and sheetfilm, film sizes used by the pro's.
I have come close to it at age 56.