Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,550   Posts: 1,544,781   Online: 1047
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21
    David R Munson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    408
    Images
    5
    David can answer for himself, but I think that all the different formats give a different look to an image. Call it a matter of tonality, maybe. 35mm looks different from medium format, which looks different from 4x5, which looks different from 8x10.

  2. #22
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,289
    Images
    20
    I think different formats have different textures, particularly when you are using short DOF. The transition between the sharp and the out-of-focus seems very much affected by format. Part of it is grain, the amount of detail resolvable on a larger piece of film which changes the particular way the sharp area looks sharp, the effect of using a certain focal length lens which affects the choice of aperture and the size of the physical aperture which affects the amount of diffraction in the sharp area and the smoothness of the out-of-focus area.

    I suppose there are other factors that aren't inherent in the format, but may be affected by choice of format--contact printing vs. enlargment, print medium, classic lenses vs. modern lenses, etc.

    I think there are also other things related to camera design that are also connected with format, but aren't really inherent in the format either. A single window range/viewfinder like the Littman has (or an SLR) should let you shoot more dynamically than the Linhof's separate rangefinder and viewfinder, but the Linhof allows for more dynamic composition than a camera with only groundglass focusing.

  3. #23
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    These shot were all handheld and I made the mistake of using FP4. I just bought a lot of HP5 and that should give me bit more latitude depth of field wise.

    I have 7 grafmatics now and will keep a couple with FP4 and the rest with HP5.

    Your are definitely right about the look being different. I have never played much with depth of field due to the nature of what I usually shoot, but I plan to do a lot more selective focus now.

    Also the skin tones are wonderful.

    Since I started using this camera, I have even started using my Linhof bi kardan a bit more as well. I have a heliar for it and it's a very interesting lens. The lack of contrast is very apparent so I have to light a little differently but the skin is amazing.

    Thanks for the comments.

  4. #24
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,289
    Images
    20
    When I want to shoot 4x5" handheld, I usually use Tri-X in Acufine at EI 640. If you like HP5, you'll probably be able to get a little more speed with it than Tri-X in Acufine, Diafine, or Microphen.

    Grafmatics are great, especially for portraits. I've got 8 so I can always have a few loaded with different kinds of film (lately Tri-X, Efke PL100, and Astia) and a few empty and ready to load.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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