DSLRUsers.com

I am SHEETSHOOTER because I SHOOT SHEET film.

Why do I do that? Well here's an attempt to offer an explanation:

Here is an image of some old newspaper stuck in a window - nothing out of this world ....

[Image deleted by author]



[Image deleted by author]


[Image deleted by author]



For those interested the details are: Toyo Field 810M MkII, Nikkor-M 450mm 1:9 lens, 8 x 10 EPR (Ektachrome) film. Transparency dry scanned on Creo IQSmart.

Cheers,

Good example of the resolution and definition available in that format... Wow, just imagine what an 8x10 sensor could produce! I think that'd be measured in Gigapixels...

Yes. That's very nice. But how much does a sheet of that stuff cost...after processing?

Matt,

I am one of those who believe that if you have to worry about the cost then you simply can't afford it. A sheet of 8 x 10 transparency and processing is $35.00. It is simply a cost of production and must be factored into the selling price of the end-product.

I might add that after a serious courtship with 8 x10 for a number of years I recently moved out of it in favour of the smaller 4 x 5 format. An exposed and processed sheet of 4 x 5 will run to about $18.00.

Keep in mind also that large format photography is a far more meditative and contemplative process whereas 35mm and digital capture are more impulsive and reactive. A big day of 4 x 5 black and white shooting for me might run to 20 shots (up to 40 sheets - or exposures). A buddy who sometimes accompanies me and shoots 6x4.5, 35mm or digital will shoot hundreds of shots during the same period.

In the final analysis it all boils down to personal preference and the statement that you wish to make. The choice of kit might impact upon the ease of making that statement or the end quality but, for me, PHOTOGRAPHY is NEVER about the kit itself, but rather it is about what the kit can do for me.

Sheetshooter, can you post the whole window so I can finish reading the newspaper? Great example of the benefits of large format photography, and interestingly your price comparison, if one has a commercial use for it, is not so bad compared to the $20- $30k digital backs around for medium format. Mind you I personally love that it is almost free to press the shutter of my DSLR. I would imagine Sheetshooter that large format gear can be picked up for a comparitive song these days with the whole world going digital.

Sheetshooter, can you post the whole window so I can finish reading the newspaper? Great example of the benefits of large format photography, and interestingly your price comparison, if one has a commercial use for it, is not so bad compared to the $20- $30k digital backs around for medium format. Mind you I personally love that it is almost free to press the shutter of my DSLR. I would imagine Sheetshooter that large format gear can be picked up for a comparitive song these days with the whole world going digital.

Flattering comments indeed Glen - especially since you saw fit to say it twice!!

There is not the abundance of large Format kit around that you might think. Not compared to Medium Format kit, anyway. I was very fortunate to just flog my Mamiya RZ system for reasonable dough - I'd have hoped for better, but I accepted what was on the table in the knowledge that it woyuld return even less in 6 months time.

We are enduring a cusp in the evolution of photography - we have been for some time and we shall continue to for some time to come. For those in long-established commercial practice like myself it is something of a tight-rope jitterbug at present. I have not functioned in an arena that was based on speedy results (such as when I did retail press ads for DJs and GBs) for a couple of decades now. My principal field of commercial endeavour is with architects, interior designers and the built environment. In that sphere it is about image control and undistorted extreme wide angle more than immediacy. Large format works for me and will continue to do so of rhte next little while until I relocate to the country and set about a more concentrated effort in the 'art' market.

Large Format photography is currently far more prevalent in the USA, Europe and Britain but there is substantial activity here also. It is a very different beast to digital capture being the preserve of antirely differing set of craft skills and pleasures and for the devottees it is probably something of a drug of addiction.

Given the size of the newspaper in the window you should call yourself

"broadsheet-shooter".


With my down market and populist views - I'll keep taking the tabloids!

It is a very different beast to digital capture being the preserve of entirely differing set of craft skills and pleasures and for the devottees it is probably something of a drug of addiction.

I think your comments about it being a set of skills and a craft is accurate, one which will become very rare over the next generation or two. Your post made me think about the $35 shutter press, that would sure make me work on my composition! I must say I have benefited from the digital revolution, I would never press the shutter as much even with 35mm film. I look back to last time I used the camera, last week, when I took this shot of a girl in a dressing gown http://www.d70users.com/viewtopic.php?t=7321&start=0 and I took 15 shots to get 3 I liked. That would have been $525 to get those images! She can stay unshot at that price. I took 150 images that day. Different sort of photography, but I for one am pleased photography has become affordable for the working class like myself.

The thing that is ever present with PHOTOGRAPHY is the enormity of its scope and application. From recreational to scientific, from promotional to informative, from coloured to monochromatic, from alternative processes of the 19th Century to phone-cams - it has become so expansive that there is room in it for everybody and we can all delight in whatever aspects of it that best suit our intentions and preferences. It should NEVER be necessary to justify one application over another or one process over another.

I would never be so bold as to post this thread in any other forum on D70 Users for fear of irrelevance, but in posting it in the Film and Non-Digital Imaging forum I feel it is an informative item to enlighten some who might not have encountered such things.

Unfortunately the internet in tandem with the computer screen is among the poorest means of delivering any sense of image quality but it is all we have at present for illustrating our deliberations. By presenting the crop as I did I hoped to convey just a morsel of the resolving power of what I used.

Cheers,

Very true, Sheetshooter. Your post has been very thought provoking and highlighted to me how many paths there are to the same spot. I actually just recently saw a tip be Leek here about using digital panoramas inside rooms. The results were very effective. Will be interested to see more of your work. I would imagine when you scan for publication your file sizes would be enormous?

Glen wrote:Sheetshooter, can you post the whole window so I can finish reading the newspaper? Great example of the benefits of large format photography, and interestingly your price comparison, if one has a commercial use for it, is not so bad compared to the $20- $30k digital backs around for medium format. Mind you I personally love that it is almost free to press the shutter of my DSLR. I would imagine Sheetshooter that large format gear can be picked up for a comparitive song these days with the whole world going digital.

The differences in attitude when shooting large format are quite astounding, really.

I used to have a 5x4; just a Nagaoka Cherrywood. Not a Toyo or Linhof, but still a very usable camera and one that you needed to use in a most deliberate manner.

We're talking about 20 years ago now, but I used to factor the cost of shooting one sheet of Fujichrome at about $6 including processing; I guess the current cost isn't too different given the effluction of time.

Mine was eventually sold to that well known camera buff, one Clive Robertson.

And the person who used to sell me my gear back in those days, David Kay, was also shooting large format - 10 x 8 - and even had a 10 x 8 enlarger in his apartment.

I would imagine you guys shooting large format must plan in advance. Seems to me that sometimes it would take as much planning as driving a semi into the city.

Glen,

Planning varies according to the objectives of the shoot. I periodically work on nude studio series as allegory and these require fore-thought as you'd expect. Invariably I need to give the model a precis of the role she is to portray and I need to ensure I have the appropriate stuff with me to take to the hire studio. Most frequently that has meant setting up a sea of 300 or so candles of late.

But outdoors I am happiest when I am as free as a bird. I'm something of a fan of the found object and after over 40 years of doing it I can set up, get my shot, pack and be back in the car in as little as 5 minutes. That, of course, is the exception rather than the rule because it is also very nice to take your time and explore the possibilities a motif has to offer.

Commercially I use a view camera all day to shoot for architects and with domestic architecture it is often necessary to be quick in order not to bother the home-owner unduly. As a rule I can get through 10 or 12 set-ups in an hour and a half. Mind you, not everybody works as quick as that.

At the other end of the scale the subject can dictate a slower process. I shot the Hoyts complex at Fox Studios and had to do interiors of the actual cinemas because they had re-introduced the dress-circle. The lighting was extremely dim even when lit. The guy at the lab looked at my trannies as they came out of the machine and asked how long the exposures were. "Three and a half pages of a novel at f16" was my reply. In other words, each actual exposure was over 20 minutes and I had taken a book and a torch so I could amuse myself while waiting. Biggest problem was that I only had time for a single exposure between each screening and the client wanted four originals and so there were many trips in and out of that auditorium. On another occasion I shot a building exterior at the Rocks in the pre-dawn glow with tungsten film. The exposure again was 15 minutes and at the end of an exposure the light had gone and so I had to set up a number of days in a row to get the shots I needed. Still, they want it and they pay for it and I enjoy doing it - what better thing for a boy to do?

So, to answer your query, like every other aspect of photography everything is variable and things are often not quite as they seem.

PS: I have also done 30 minute exposures on 35mm. And when I shot for Playboy and Penthouse in the early days the usual exposure on Kodachrome 25 for a girl sitting in a room was about 1/4 sec at f4. Time is the least of our worries.

Cheers,

Sheetshooter you have a lot of commercial experience
would you like to break into the Art market?
Large format photography sells, just look at Bill Henson's success. You also have experience with the female nude a perfect muse for any artistic expression.

Sheetshooter wrote:The lighting was extremely dim even when lit. The guy at the lab looked at my trannies as they came out of the machine and asked how long the exposures were. "Three and a half pages of a novel at f16" was my reply. In other words, each actual exposure was over 20 minutes and I had taken a book and a torch so I could amuse myself while waiting.

Exposures of those sorts of durations of course bring other technical issues to the fore. Your metering may tell you that you want f16 @ 15 minutes, but the film stock that you're using tells you that for an exposure of that length of time, the film will be subject to reciprocity failure and you need to calculate extra compensating factors to address that problem.

Biggest problem was that I only had time for a single exposure between each screening and the client wanted four originals and so there were many trips in and out of that auditorium. On another occasion I shot a building exterior at the Rocks in the pre-dawn glow with tungsten film. The exposure again was 15 minutes and at the end of an exposure the light had gone and so I had to set up a number of days in a row to get the shots I needed. Still, they want it and they pay for it and I enjoy doing it - what better thing for a boy to do?

Getting up at dawn? They'd want to pay bloody well for that.

Sheetshooter, interesting to hear the different ways people work. You obviously are familiar with your equipment. I love the term f16 and 3 and a half pages

Gary,

I've spent my life working at dawn and dusk - a bit like the motion-picture business really. I love it and wouldn't have a clue how else to get what I want done.

The effects of reciprocity certainly kick in with such long exposures although it has to be said that the film I was using (Ektachrome Tungsten - EPY) is extremely predictable and repeatable in its performance. At times a little gentle colour filtration can also be called for which in turn adds another 1/3 or 1/2 stop of exposure.

One thing I must enquire of with David is the reciprocity characteristics of digital capture.

Sheetshooter wrote:Gary,

I've spent my life working at dawn and dusk - a bit like the motion-picture business really. I love it and wouldn't have a clue how else to get what I want done.

I need to get out camping again, so that I can be up and about - and doing stuff - at that time of the day. These days I'm far too old and crotchety to be up, out of my warm bed, before sparrow's fart.

Even when on holidays, and solo, I have trouble getting started for the day. If I have someone with me - Lindy, typically, or perhaps Sycamore #1, it makes it that much harder again.

The effects of reciprocity certainly kick in with such long exposures although it has to be said that the film I was using (Ektachrome Tungsten - EPY) is extremely predictable and repeatable in its performance. At times a little gentle colour filtration can also be called for which in turn adds another 1/3 or 1/2 stop of exposure.

Ah yes ... I'd forgotten about that aspect of it all.

One thing I must enquire of with David is the reciprocity characteristics of digital capture.

I suspect a real issue would be the temperature of the sensor, and keeping it cool for the duration of the exposure time.