Why do you shoot LF?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fastw

So, why do you shoot LF? Is it just the neg size or is it the DOF? Is it the slowness of the process even when compared to manual MF. If it's the big size, how big do you print? I'm really tempted to try it, but not really sure why.

Cheers, Wojtek.

---

DOF? What DOF? A 300mm to 360mm lens is standard for 8x10, even at f:22 there is little DOF. What you do have with a view camera is control over where you place the plane of focus.

I use LF for the tonality, detail, the contemplative way of working, the control, the large groundglass "viewfinder", the versatility, the ability to make decent size grainless prints with smooth tonality and extreme detail, and the possibility of using vastly different lens types each of which have their own character. I also enjoy the equipment - the wood cameras and so on.

Edit - I like challenges. I like knowing that it's up to me to use the equipment to (or near) it's potential.
Using LF has also made me a much better photographer, regardless of the format I'm using. One of the first things I learned from LF was pre-visualisation, that is knowing what the print will look like before I expose the negative. This is a valuable skill with any size camera.

All of the above plus sometimes I only need one negative and I want it to be really good negative. 4x5 is what I shoot.

Size matters. Godzilla stomps Bambi every time.

that's the film my camera takes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DREW WILEY

Size matters. Godzilla stomps Bambi every time.

---

I'm not so sure.
The last time I tried existing light photos in a barroom with my Deardorff V8 it was a dismal failure...;)

1-Detail
2-Movements
3-Ability to shoot 1 frame and go directly to development, no waiting to finish a roll.
4-Ability to adjust development without cutting undeveloped rolls; shoot 2, develop #1, make a print, make a decision, then develop #2.

LF photography distills shooting down to it's bare essence. No fancy digital displays on the ground glass. The image is in my face upside down and actual size. I tend to shoot less film and make the shots count. Sometimes shooting LF is quite meditative and most of the time, I'm struggling with an unforgiving beast. Always, I have to be mindful when I shoot with it. I think all photo students should struggle with LF. It makes them better photographers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh

...
One of the first things I learned from LF was pre-visualisation, that is knowing what the print will look like before I expose the negative. This is a valuable skill with any size camera.


...
The last time I tried existing light photos in a barroom with my Deardorff V8 it was a dismal failure...

---

and that's proof right there that there is no such thing as "previsualization".

most of the best photographs have been "happy accidents" as a matter of fact.

anybody says they can predict the future is LYING.

PERIOD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnielvis

anybody says they can predict the future is LYING.

PERIOD.

---

Aren't you predicting the future when you say this, making you a self-confessed liar, and therefore making this claim wrong?

PERIOD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LJH

Aren't you predicting the future when you say this, making you a self-confessed liar, and therefore making this claim wrong?

PERIOD.

---

nope...a fact was stated (the future cannot be predicted), that is all. a fact is not a prediction.

people fool themselves into believing that they can have control, but they have none. nature and chance have to cooperate with the "controller". Most of the time, if the "controller" goes with the law of average outcomes, then his outcome will be pleasing--thus reinforcing the belief that there was some "control" being exercised.