Crazy idea: 4X5 advice needed

[RSalles]

Well, the situation is as follows:

I love color photograph. But with digital, I have the sensation that I do less than I did with film only with B&W - and I'm not sure why.

I'm cooking the idea to restart film photo in these terms:
Acquire a 4X5 sheet film camera. And make the hole process myself.
I have worked with 4X5 cameras at studio before as studio assistent or 2º photographer, but I never interested myself with this sort of photographie to work with just for pleasure or experimentation, or hobby.

And never bought this type of equipement before. So, some question:

What's - for landscape photo, architecture and for still - could be the best approach: a field camera, as the Linhof Technika 4X5, or Graflex or EBONY SW45,
or a monorail camera as the Sinar, Cambo, etc?

For development, is there any sort of problem to find good resellers for B&W film and paper?

Enlargers, the ones for 4X5 are much more expensive compared to normal 35mm enlargers?

Any help will be very much appreciated,

Yours,

Renato

[mmelvis]

The first questions I would ask,

How much do you budgeted for your camera gear?

PM BKSPicture and iangreenhalgh1, they both have a wealth of knowledge with this format.

Also be sure sure to check out http://www.largeformatphotography.info/ , some of the members here are also members on this forum.

[Farside]

Nearly the cheapest way [1] of getting into 4x5 is via a Graphic Camera, but depends on what you want to spend and what your usage will be. For architecture, you will need all the movements a good field or tech cam will give you, for landscape, very little.
Just for landscapes a Crown Graphic might do - it's all I bought mine for.
Even my Linhof is a Press variant and has fewer movements than the Crown - ironically enough.
If I were buying another Linhof and paying attention to budget, I'd look seriously at a late Technika III, but if you can stretch to at Tech IV or V, there's a greater degree of facilities available and parts are too. The early ones are nice, but most of them have already had a hard pro life and many are showing their age - not that they're not built to take it, but it just depends on what you'd be happy with.
There's a British copy of the Tech III, the MPP MkIII which has all the movements and generally works out at half the price for a good one. The MPP is available in MkVII and MkVIII too, and the later cameras are really nice.
Linhofs are lovely, but I don't think I'd want to keep on paying Linhof prices for spares; fully justified if it's a camera that's working professionally, but not a hobby cam.

As far as enlargements go ; all I do is scan and get outside one-off printing done of the ones I think worth keeping. On a thread the other day I mentioned I discovered my ViewII was actually designed to be used as an enlarger, too. That's a step too far for me, though, as I want to keep from going back to a darkroom.

[1] Actually, the really cheap way of getting into it is with a monorail cam - you could assemble one or buy complete. My ViewII was only 80-odd dollars, but obviously at that price needed lens, lensboard, etc. It did come with a Graflok back, though.
Similar bargains can be found on more modern monorails if you keep your eyes open.

[RSalles]

Thanks mmelvis, thanks Farside. The path is beginning to be more clear now,

Cheers,

Renato

[mmelvis]

[cooltouch]

If you need a lot of movements, a monorail can't be beat. Some of your better field cameras have a decent amount of movement. If I were to go with a field, budget being an issue, I'd go with a Shen Hao 4x5. Made in China but the materials and craftsmanship are reasonably good. One of the best deals around for a monorail is the Graphic View II that Farside mentioned.

Don't skimp on lenses. If you need a lot of movements, your lenses will need a large enough image circle to handle these movements.

Prices of enlargers have plummeted because of the switchover by so many shops to digital. So you might be able to pick up one that will handle 4x5 for not a whole lot of money. Me, I wouldn't waste my time or effort or money on a 4x5 enlarger. I have an Epson 4990 scanner that will scan 4x5s. Does a fantastic job, too. Then I can send the files to a photo printer or send them out to a pro lab.

[RSalles]

Cooltouch,

The problem with scanning et all is that around the town we live, there isn't a professional printing service: I have to send to a distant city 450 km or more from where I live and learn to wait.

For me, at this moment, it COULD be an option to buy a A3 printer first class, as the Epson R series photo printer. But does it worth the small amount of print by month I have to do? That's the question.

Enlarging myself, I could see immediately the results of the work at least in B&W and in a very decent resolution. My intention is to use the printing service for color and enlarge the B&W stuff myself.
Is it a bad idea?

[]s,

Renato

[dochertyinbc]

Renato,
I shoot assignment and personal colour work with Nikon DSLR and Nikon optics, mostly manual focus, all with an aperture ring. I make my own prints up to A3 and have a pro lab in Vancouver handle larger prints and metallic paper laser printing.

I shoot fine art on B&W film using a 35mm Nikon F3, plus an odd array of quirk-oldies that caught me at flea markets, etc.; I shoot 6X6 with an old Kowa Super 66 system; 6X9 via roll film to 4X5 converter, which of course indicates that I shoot 4X5, in my case using a Sinar F2. I also hybrid using my DSLR on the back of the Sinar using an adapter plate.


Regarding Develop and Printing:
All my B&W is developed and printed in my darkroom at home. I have three enlargers and seven lenses. Two of the enlargers are capable of 4X5, but only one has the carriers needed. I purchased all three enlargers with lenses and all needed accessories, along with tons of expired films and papers, all of which have served me well except for one box of paper that came out of the bag colored like a nicotine stain! Total expenditure? Under $700.00 CDN. Point is, darkrooms are cheap now that the masses have converted and few appreciate the tactile experience of hands in the material creation. The darkroom is a place where you connect. You connect with the material and the machinery, you connect with yourself. And you acquire the process of connecting your picture with your picture making, in that not only do you reflect upon taking the image as you see it evolving in the red room, you also think about that final process while you consider, compose, focus, and release the shutter. Now it can be said that you are making, not taking, an image. Now you are connected to it completely.

Regarding Monorail In the Field:
As my year of photography school in Vancouver was drawing to a close, I knew I didn’t want to leave the city and return to hicksville without a LF camera. I had used folding field cameras and monorail units while in school, though both are awesome to work with I was particularly drawn to the additional control afforded by the monorails movements. Where there is a yin there is a yang, and as much as I love the studio, most of my work is made in the great outdoors. People told me a monorail was useless in the field and I should just stick with a folder. So many forums agreed. I could not afford a camera for each, in fact I could not afford one at all! Yet I must needed had one (past tense of must needs have...), so I made a difficult decision, selling my 80-400 mm telephoto would provide budget for the Large Format Experience. Now the hunt was on.

Watching for what was available locally, cash ready at hand, all that was needed was to make a decision and hope it would be the right one. Then the crow in me spotted something shiny... I returned to my woodland nest with a Sinar F2 kit including 210mm & 90mm lenses on boards, 10 film holders, extra bellows, roll film back, dark cloth and more, all neatly packed in a Sinar hard case, all for the price of a used Nikon DX telephoto zoom!

So how does a monorail get by in the field? By sliding the standards into the center of the rail, the camera fits readily into slotted foam inserts cut to fit front loading backpacks. Extra spaces cut into the foam stash away all sorts of goodies. My DSLR hanging from the neck feels worse than the LF in the pack, and with an extra lens included the digital kit is heavier anyway. When the rail camera can remain intact, such as the Sinar can, from setting up tripod till dialing in composition and focus is only marginally slower than with any other format or system when the photographer takes the care to use a tripod in completing a well contemplated shot.

When shooting is not so remote as a hike-in, such as architecture and still, portability is not an issue unless you are confined to two wheels or public transportation, but there again you can use your backpack. Speaking of architecture, landscape and still- all are best served by the greater latitude of both corrective and creative control afforded by monorail over the image.

A final thought connecting LF and home processing, 4x5 sheets do very well in 5x7 trays. It is not difficult and a single sheet ~ small stack typically takes 20-30 minutes, not all of which must be in the dark. Dark tanks, though costing more, mean that after you load the film in total darkness you are free to turn on the lights.

Whatever you choose, I encourage you to pursue it with passion, be true to yourself, and sign your work with excellence.

[RSalles]

dochertyinbc wrote:

Point is, darkrooms are cheap now that the masses have converted and few appreciate the tactile experience of hands in the material creation. The darkroom is a place where you connect. You connect with the material and the machinery, you connect with yourself. And you acquire the process of connecting your picture with your picture making, in that not only do you reflect upon taking the image as you see it evolving in the red room, you also think about that final process while you consider, compose, focus, and release the shutter. Now it can be said that you are making, not taking, an image. Now you are connected to it completely.

Sometimes I have the impression that all the digital process is a sort of darkroom instance without me inside...



dochertyinbc wrote:

When shooting is not so remote as a hike-in, such as architecture and still, portability is not an issue unless you are confined to two wheels or public transportation, but there again you can use your backpack. Speaking of architecture, landscape and still- all are best served by the greater latitude of both corrective and creative control afforded by monorail over the image.

Yes, that's the main reason I discarded at the very biginning the Hasselblad hardware idea.


dochertyinbc wrote:

Whatever you choose, I encourage you to pursue it with passion, be true to yourself, and sign your work with excellence.


I would like to let you know that I appreciated a lot, really, the description of your own experince, your reasons and the hardware you choosed for you as LF camera, and all the time as well you've spended enhumerating each step that had driven your decision.

It's absolutely not the case to abandon the digital process at all, but to circunvect the limits imposed by the sole use of it. One can make everything with an I-Phone, but can make even better with a Pro camera. And for certain types of photographie where the time of delivery is not the most important factor, we can choose the longer process of LF photographie as well.

Thank you again,

Renato

[philslizzy]

[dochertyinbc]

Happy to be helpful.

Photography isn't just about the image, it is also about the process. Instant, inexpensive, disposable picture taking ignores the process and if Yin is missing Yang it will be out of balance. Dido for being wrapped up in the process without considering
through the final image. Worst is when the process is so spontaneous that a final image is not even given serious thought.

Why take the picture in the first place? This is where I believe manual photographic processes excel for the artistically bent; I have discarded more photo attempts when working analog then ever while shooting digital. Shooting digi it doesn't matter, I can delete it later if it doesn't work. Film comes at a measurable cost, as I work my way through I will oft times ask myself if it will be worth it in the end, will it make a print if I nail it? If not, why bother pressing the shutter? Wait for the light; find a better composition; get rid of that white pail beside the barn; or discard the scene and hunt for another, one more worthy? This is part of what I mean when I say shooting analog connects me more with my image. I do shoot a lot of digital, and I like to think that I am connected to my work then as well, but I am happiest when I am contemplating the world inverted through a ground glass screen.

David

[RSalles]

Damn,

lost an auction for a Linhof Kardan GT for less than 20 bucks,
People in Germany doesn't ship overseas, and I would to end this drama ASAP...

Renato