Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,951   Posts: 1,585,997   Online: 793
      
Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 148
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    16,890
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    They never made a 3 1/2" Verito in any 35mm mount, or a Cooke Portrait with the knuckle-duster soft-focus adjustment. And you're forced to develop all 36 frames with the exact same time and temperature and developer chemistry - so inevitably there will be some frames that would have benefitted from altered processing that won't get it, or you sacrifice every other frame on the roll to the needs of the one frame.
    not really true ...


    lensbaby makes something exactly like an imageon, and the original imageon is made ... for 35mm ...
    it is EZ to get similar effects with a regular 35mm lens and a technique to soften the image &c

    forced to process 36 frames in the exact same chemistry .. ?

    plenty of people who shoot 35mm roll their own and do small rolls
    DBI or clip parts of the rolls and process it in a different time/temp/dilution/chemical

    pretty much everything that can be done with LF can be done with 35mm.
    the only real limitation is the person using the camera ...
    Last edited by jnanian; 10-08-2012 at 10:08 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Berlin Wi.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    249

    I'm surprised no one seem to mention slides.

    I read all the posts but not 100% of each, but I didn't see anyone mention slides. I took two rolls of a family wedding a few weeks ago on slides and one roll of prints. Last week I went to my sisters house (she wasn't at the wedding) and set up the projector and screen and we looked at slides. Yes, you can take slides with a MF but the projectors are rare and expensive. (Actually 35mm projectors if you can find them are expensive too.) I like looking at a 3 foot by 4 foot picture and that fact that you can show it to several people at the same time. I sent scanned copies on a CD to the bride, but nothing compares to the color and the wow factor of seeing that picture blown up to the size of a table. Ric.

    P.S. I have never seen a LF slide projector.

  3. #53
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,519
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    437
    Ric- there was a projector made years ago for projecting 4x5 slides. At least I recall seeing one in a catalog somewhere. But it was rather ridiculous. And MF projectors aren't quite as rare as you think, but they are silly expensive. And the only ones that could handle 6x7 transparencies had a manual, one-at-a-time loading system. Only the 6x6/6x4.5 projectors had some kind of tray or carousel.

  4. #54
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300
    My opinion is that one camera format isn't better than the other. Only that the best camera is the one that:
    A. Allows us to get the shot we want and need.
    B. The one we are familiar with and isn't an impediment to our work flow.

    I still can't understand why people are so opposed to big enlargements from 35mm. Is the little bit of grain that's there really that detrimental to the picture? My own opinion is that it's just silly to get hooked up on something like grain. A print that is deliciously well crafted will look amazing regardless of film format, and I feel that those who say they can't get a good print from 35mm because of the small negative simply isn't a good enough printer.

    Just go make some more freaking prints. Become better printers. Look at masterpieces by those who DO know what they're doing, by visiting museums, galleries, auctions, art shows, etc. Learn. If 35mm was good enough for some true masters such as Ralph Gibson, Sebastiao Salgado, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Elliot Erwitt, William Eggleston, Harry Guyaert, Alex Webb, how about Charles Harbutt, and Max mentioned Vivian Cherry. The list goes on and on and on.

    The question should instead be - how can I make the best print that I possibly can, regardless of what camera I love to use?
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,169
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Ric Trexell View Post
    P.S. I have never seen a LF slide projector.
    These come pretty cheap and I believe they were made for "Lantern Slides" AKA glass plates.

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Bese...item1e643864bf
    Dave

    "She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
    She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.

    It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."

    From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars

  6. #56
    baachitraka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    My opinion is that one camera format isn't better than the other. Only that the best camera is the one that:
    A. Allows us to get the shot we want and need.
    B. The one we are familiar with and isn't an impediment to our work flow.

    I still can't understand why people are so opposed to big enlargements from 35mm. Is the little bit of grain that's there really that detrimental to the picture? My own opinion is that it's just silly to get hooked up on something like grain. A print that is deliciously well crafted will look amazing regardless of film format, and I feel that those who say they can't get a good print from 35mm because of the small negative simply isn't a good enough printer.

    Just go make some more freaking prints. Become better printers. Look at masterpieces by those who DO know what they're doing, by visiting museums, galleries, auctions, art shows, etc. Learn. If 35mm was good enough for some true masters such as Ralph Gibson, Sebastiao Salgado, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Elliot Erwitt, William Eggleston, Harry Guyaert, Alex Webb, how about Charles Harbutt, and Max mentioned Vivian Cherry. The list goes on and on and on.

    The question should instead be - how can I make the best print that I possibly can, regardless of what camera I love to use?
    My learning came with experimenting different print/paper sizes without changing the film format.

    Higher the size of the print/paper demands more control, yielding better printing skills if not better prints.

    Upto to my experience printing 35mm neg on 8x10 and 16x20 is not the same, ignoring the grain.
    OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
    Rolleicord Va: Humble.
    Holga 120GFN: Amazingly simple yet it produces outstanding negatives to print.

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    And you're forced to develop all 36 frames with the exact same time and temperature and developer chemistry - so inevitably there will be some frames that would have benefitted from altered processing that won't get it, or you sacrifice every other frame on the roll to the needs of the one frame.
    Not if you have an Exakta with internal film splitter! (Or a Contaflex with interchangeable backs...)

  8. #58
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,519
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    437
    And how many people are still shooting those? (Not that they're invalid cameras, but they're not your garden variety Nikon/Canon/Minolta/Pentax/Konica/Yashica/Contax/Olympus/Petri/Leica/etceteraflex).

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,686
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    The relationship between depth of field and format size becomes way more interesting when one starts doing close-up/macro work.
    True. One learns quickly to use the smallest format possible.

  10. #60
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,685
    Images
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    I haven't figured out yet why a 35mm rangefinder raised to your eye is less conspicuous than a 35mm SLR - they're both in front of your face, and pointed directly at the subject. Once the exposure is taken, there's an obvious difference in the noise level with the mirror slap and the (probable) film advance motors kicking in.
    It probably isn't and just a myth put about by 35mm RF users.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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