Large Format photography group - From "zero to hero!"

FishyFish said:
Thanks Chris. I’ll beat this in mind. In fact I might spend some time practice-loading the film holders into the camera without taking any photos, looking at how they fit more carefully.

The film was already loaded in this one when I got it, but it didn’t look like it was out of the channels when I took it out of the camera. I think the notch was at the dark slide end, but I don’t know if this might cause a snag? I’ve loaded my new sheets with the notch at the flap end of the holders.

I’ve also seen a few mentions of it being more likely in portrait mode, as @Karl.t1965 mentions.

In fact, this Bryan Birks video made me smile when I rewatched it earlier. :)

View: https://youtu.be/zMSWSICC-xE
Click to expand...
A video that indeed shows that we’re not alone at screwing up.

It also shows that shooting a fairly large batch of film in one outing especially as a debutant is not the best of ideas.

A couple or imo a max of four exposures is more than enough to then soup and assess the results.


FishyFish said:
Thanks Chris. I’ll beat this in mind. In fact I might spend some time practice-loading the film holders into the camera without taking any photos, looking at how they fit more carefully.

The film was already loaded in this one when I got it, but it didn’t look like it was out of the channels when I took it out of the camera. I think the notch was at the dark slide end, but I don’t know if this might cause a snag? I’ve loaded my new sheets with the notch at the flap end of the holders.

I’ve also seen a few mentions of it being more likely in portrait mode, as @Karl.t1965 mentions.

In fact, this Bryan Birks video made me smile when I rewatched it earlier. :)

View: https://youtu.be/zMSWSICC-xE
Click to expand...

Having the notch at the darkslide entry end may increase the chances of a snag.

Ive always put the notch to the flap end of the holder, besides anything else it allows very easy confirmation of what type of film is loaded just by opening the darkslide slightly ( in the dark of course) if notes are lost, memory failure etc
 
Asha said:
Flipping eck, talk about making things complicated.

Everybody to their own I guess.

If a problem arises, look further into the source of the problem but I wouldn’t go all out to be able to trace back every last detail of every exposure just for the sake of it.


Just load the film and expose it.!
Click to expand...

I keep things simple to the extent of not being a "real" large format film photographer. I don't use a spot meter, don't use the zone system, don't deviate from my normal developing times (to control contrast), don't make a note of exposures and don't number my film holders. My metering and development still manage to give me negatives I like. I don't even overly worry about extra lens extension - half a stop if moderately close (which is within tolerance if I forget) and that's it.

That said, I do appear to produce denser negatives than minimum exposure would, but remembering how Kodak first determined film speeds I don't worry about it. All I do is stick my open hand in the same light as the subject, take a reflected reading from the palm and add 1 stop. I rate FP4 at 80, so I'm technically overexposing from the start. I can easily take the lack of sharpness and larger grain more than minimum exposure gives on LF, so I don't worry.
 
Asha said:
A video that indeed shows that we’re not alone at screwing up.

It also shows that shooting a fairly large batch of film in one outing especially as a debutant is not the best of ideas.

A couple or imo a max of four exposures is more than enough to then soup and assess the results.
Click to expand...

I fairness to Bryan Birks, he's gotten significantly more accomplished at using large format in the intevening years since that video was made. I just remembered it following my own mishaps. :)

I have to say that, despite the issues I've had (and I've still to develop some HP5+ sheets that may provide more!), I'm still keen to take more pictures with the camera. Every mistake is an opportunity to improve (is what I will tell myself...).
 
StephenM said:
I keep things simple to the extent of not being a "real" large format film photographer. I don't use a spot meter, don't use the zone system, don't deviate from my normal developing times (to control contrast), don't make a note of exposures and don't number my film holders. My metering and development still manage to give me negatives I like. I don't even overly worry about extra lens extension - half a stop if moderately close (which is within tolerance if I forget) and that's it.

That said, I do appear to produce denser negatives than minimum exposure would, but remembering how Kodak first determined film speeds I don't worry about it. All I do is stick my open hand in the same light as the subject, take a reflected reading from the palm and add 1 stop. I rate FP4 at 80, so I'm technically overexposing from the start. I can easily take the lack of sharpness and larger grain more than minimum exposure gives on LF, so I don't worry.
Click to expand...

Seems that there are at least two LF togs in here that aren’t ´real’ large format photographers then;)
 
I practiced in the light with a dead sheet, then in the dark. I laid out the stuff in order and just kept practicing.

I haven't loaded many 'for real' so I am sure I will screw up at some point but so far so good.
 
FishyFish said:
I didn't make a note of which film holder had the problematic sheet inside and I've now loaded two of them with fresh film. Hopefully it won't happen again, but I'm going to start noting which holder was used for each shot along with the other details.
Click to expand...
I used Evernote on my phone to record details of shots, although it is a pain (doesn't seem to work at all if there's no signal). Apple Notes might be better if you're an iPhone person. I did try the Shots app, but too much overhead. LF was the only situation where I really wanted to record details, and free-form seemed to work fine!
 
What are we all devving in? I tried 510 Pyro but its going back on the shelf till I move cos that stuff STAINS, thankfully itll be still be good when I come to use it next.
Back to Ilford HC for me
 
acrobatic_Citron said:
What are we all devving in? I tried 510 Pyro but its going back on the shelf till I move cos that stuff STAINS, thankfully itll be still be good when I come to use it next.
Back to Ilford HC for me
Click to expand...

I'm using Fomadon R09 for Fomapan films (it's just a rebranded version of the original version of Rodinal), and DD-X for most other stuff.
 
FishyFish said:
I'm using Fomadon R09 for Fomapan films (it's just a rebranded version of the original version of Rodinal), and DD-X for most other stuff.
Click to expand...
you just cant go wrong with rodinal in any form, dont want to use dd-x yet incase I like it too much

Asha said:
HC-110for all negative b&w films be it fomapan, ilford, adox or other.
Click to expand...
The HC brother

Peter B said:
Replenished stock Xtol for all sizes and makes of b&w film. Occasionally HC110 as well.
Click to expand...
Do you make 5 litres at a time? How long does it keep for?
 
And I'm still using Agfa Rodinal - yes, in the Agfa packaging. I stockpiled slightly when I heard about Agfa ceasing production. I'll probably try HC110 when I run out, unless the Rodinal goes off or I die.
 
This afternoon I have been digging in the darker corners of zx9 towers and found my CombiPlan 54 tank, a part used pack of 54 Fomapan 100 and an unopened pack of Rollei IR in 54, quite what possessed me to buy the later I know not.
Next step should be to dust down the Sinar F1 which has been in hibernation for the last decade but don't hold your collective breaths. :)
 
Peter B said:
I make the 5 litres then split it into 1 litre bottles. The batch I'm using now is the last litre from October 2021 and it's absolutely fine.
Click to expand...
Thats good to know, keen to try out this Adox XT3 as they do it in 1 litre packs
 
My third set of results.

I developed four sheets of HP5+ today. I knew that ony two sheets would have images but, being slightly paranoid, I developed the others at the same time in case I'd somehow got the film holders mixed up.

The two correctly exposed images are below. I still had some issues. From a technical point of view there is still some softness coming into play where I've not checked focus properly and there is a bit of unwanted tilt or swing. And then there was a development issue where a (thankfully small) strip of both negatives was underdeveloped and darker than the rest of the frame. I can only assume that I somehow put too little developer in the tank, although I'm surprised if that was the case. Whatever, I've had to crop them both slightly.

Chroma 4x5
Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6
Ilford HP5+
Ilfotec DDX 1+4 9 mins @ 20°

Both at f/22.



The house by the railway by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr



Chesterfield Canal at Shireoaks by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Those are very good for first shots in the open, I can see the soft bottom left corner of the second shot, are you thinking that the lens was tilted up wards slightly because the brick work looks constant all the way across that image.

FishyFish said:
Chroma 4x5
Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6
Ilford HP5+
Ilfotec DDX 1+25 9 mins @ 20°
Click to expand...

The DDX would have been 1+ 4 I am guessing the error is typing not chemical mixing.
 
zx9 said:
Those are very good for first shots in the open, I can see the soft bottom left corner of the second shot, are you thinking that the lens was tilted up wards slightly because the brick work looks constant all the way across that image.
Click to expand...

It's quite possible. I haven't got the hang of focusing the whole image yet. I know what to do, but it's very easy to get one part of the image nice and sharp while knocking another part out of focus. It's one of the main things I need to concentrate on. I feel pretty self-concious (and oddly vulnerable) when I'm farting about under the dark cloth too, which doesn't help. :D

The DDX would have been 1+ 4 I am guessing the error is typing not chemical mixing.
Click to expand...

Well spotted. Yes, a typo (I'd copied some text from another shot that I developed in R09)
 
FishyFish said:
It's quite possible. I haven't got the hang of focusing the whole image yet. I know what to do, but it's very easy to get one part of the image nice and sharp while knocking another part out of focus. It's one of the main things I need to concentrate on. I feel pretty self-concious (and oddly vulnerable) when I'm farting about under the dark cloth too, which doesn't help. :D
Click to expand...
At college we spent days doing pack shots of orange juice cartons lined up at an angle to the camera, placing the plane of sharp focus, distortion control, understanding how they all go together.
It would be worth your while to do something similar for a couple of hours even if you don't make any exposures it will help you get your head around things.

As for the outdoors vulnerability feeling is quite natural, we were in central London at collage in the 80's and the rule was if booking large format to take out of the building always take a friend to assist and watch your back.

There are plenty of places round here, SE London, that I am quite happy to wander around with a few £K of Canon or Leica but that is not on a tripod under a dark cloth. Anyone local ish that you could team up with, off here or Flickr perhaps?
 
FishyFish said:
It's quite possible. I haven't got the hang of focusing the whole image yet. I know what to do, but it's very easy to get one part of the image nice and sharp while knocking another part out of focus. It's one of the main things I need to concentrate on. I feel pretty self-concious (and oddly vulnerable) when I'm farting about under the dark cloth too, which doesn't help. :D



Well spotted. Yes, a typo (I'd copied some text from another shot that I developed in R09)
Click to expand...
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOynPW7aSHI


This is the best video Ive seen so far on plane of focus and how to put it where you want, its dry but gets the point across very well and the tip is to move the back not the front for focus to keep magnification constant
 
zx9 said:
At college we spent days doing pack shots of orange juice cartons lined up at an angle to the camera, placing the plane of sharp focus, distortion control, understanding how they all go together.
It would be worth your while to do something similar for a couple of hours even if you don't make any exposures it will help you get your head around things.

As for the outdoors vulnerability feeling is quite natural, we were in central London at collage in the 80's and the rule was if booking large format to take out of the building always take a friend to assist and watch your back.

There are plenty of places round here, SE London, that I am quite happy to wander around with a few £K of Canon or Leica but that is not on a tripod under a dark cloth. Anyone local ish that you could team up with, off here or Flickr perhaps?
Click to expand...

I think it's more a case of not paying attention and spending the time to check focus that's my problem. I understand the principle (or at least well enought to move tha camera to get what I want), I'm just not putting it into practice as effectively as I need to.

I'm not particularly worried about being attacked or anything when using the dark cloth - I'm not planning on setting the camera up anywhere risky in that way - I think it's just that general sense that you lose awareness of your surroundings. It's a new and strange feeling (photographically, at least) that I will get used to in time.
 
acrobatic_Citron said:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOynPW7aSHI


This is the best video Ive seen so far on plane of focus and how to put it where you want, its dry but gets the point across very well and the tip is to move the back not the front for focus to keep magnification constant
Click to expand...
Beware of verticals when tilting the rear standard…….perfect for redressing them if they converge but if already vertical, tilting the rear standard can have an adverse effect .
 
zx9 said:
Next step should be to dust down the Sinar F1 which has been in hibernation for the last decade but don't hold your collective breaths. :)
Click to expand...
IMG_7197v800.jpg

Sinar F with long bellows and a short ish rail plus extension rail, longer bellow fitted which look ok, 150mm Symmar lens nice and clean and shutter sounds about right, 4DSS and a Arca 69RFH , one DDS is showing black side out, I will get out the changing bag and investigate later.


Whilst typing the above I remembered where more bits are stored and found a new set of standard bellows, new but the glue is looking a bit tacky so not sure about those and four more DDS.

That lot was last used eleven years ago just before I lost the use of my darkroom to the loft conversion.
 
What tripods we all using? My mirrorless tripod is not up to the task and the legs are bowing if fully extended , under the weight of the camera and manfrotto head
 
Manfrotto carbon fibre one, years old, something like a C441 which I doubt is still made. My head is a Manfrotto 3 way head to hold a heavy camera (about 9lbs for my Canham 10x8). One of the other tripods (we have at least 4) is a Benbo, the original big one from before all the model designations and alternative Benbos appeared (note BenBo not BenRo) which is very firm and versatile. Legs can sit in water, or two on the ground and one resting on a tree etc..
 
acrobatic_Citron said:
What tripods we all using? My mirrorless tripod is not up to the task and the legs are bowing if fully extended , under the weight of the camera and manfrotto head
Click to expand...
Carbon ‘silk road ‘ GIOTTOS I think the brand is.

Had it ages and prefer it over my alu manfrotto 055xproB simply for the weight difference.

Doubtful that either model is still available to purchase new.
I’ve had a number of problems with the Giottos which although they rectified, even by replacing the complete tripod at one stage, I would not buy the same brand again.

Manfrotto on the other hand , I’ve never had a problem with ( inc other models that I’ve had over the years).

It is heavier but sometimes more beneficial for sturdiness.
Both tripods have manfrotto heads, the Giottos holds a geared head and the proB sports a ball head.

The proB set up is by a long way the most sturdy when using 10x8 or a LF outfit at full extension .

Both tripods stand high, the Giottos very high which was one of my reasons for buying it ( no I’m not tall!) …. Just a shame it hasn’t offered a service without faults.

May I politely suggest that you invest in a better tripod……. LF ( or any other ) kit with inferior support beneath it is asking for tears.
 
Last edited:
In some cases, why people use one rather than another can be revealing. There are different subjects that may require different tripods - if I were photographing in muddy, wet or sandy (fine sand particularly) conditions, or wanted to place my tripod in water, I'd pick my Benbo (the legs collapse in top down, rather than bottom up, so grit etc. on the lower section doesn't get packed inside the telescoped legs. Similarly, if the ground required the tripod to be partially braced with a leg up a tree or against a wall or fence, the Benbo is the first choice.

Heads also matter. Pan and tilt, ball and three way (with or without gears) all have pros and cons, but aside from the type, carrying weight matters if you're using a heavy camera or a camera with a heavy lens.
 
StephenM said:
In some cases, why people use one rather than another can be revealing. There are different subjects that may require different tripods - if I were photographing in muddy, wet or sandy (fine sand particularly) conditions, or wanted to place my tripod in water, I'd pick my Benbo (the legs collapse in top down, rather than bottom up, so grit etc. on the lower section doesn't get packed inside the telescoped legs. Similarly, if the ground required the tripod to be partially braced with a leg up a tree or against a wall or fence, the Benbo is the first choice.

Heads also matter. Pan and tilt, ball and three way (with or without gears) all have pros and cons, but aside from the type, carrying weight matters if you're using a heavy camera or a camera with a heavy lens.
Click to expand...
Yeah, for now I'd be after a general use/dry outdoor, no sand, maybe mud at a push in the wonderful english countryside, I picked up a superb condition manfrotto 410 head on this forum a couple of weeks back. It has to hold a Chamonix n-2 and my heaviest lens Fuji NW 250 at 3kg total with DDS inserted
 
acrobatic_Citron said:
Yeah, for now I'd be after a general use/dry outdoor, no sand, maybe mud at a push in the wonderful english countryside, I picked up a superb condition manfrotto 410 head on this forum a couple of weeks back. It has to hold a Chamonix n-2 and my heaviest lens Fuji NW 250 at 3kg total with DDS inserted
Click to expand...
Weight is but one thing to consider.

If simply attaching a camera to a tripod and depressing the shutter release, a set up that will accept say 4kg will be suitable for a kit weighing +/-3kg
Maximum weight figures given by manufacturers are very much that, a max figure based on the centre of gravity being close the the tripod central column

This generally doesn’t take into account other stresses of which there are many especially with LF

To mention a few:

Fully extended camera

Darkcloth attachment

Dark slide insertion / removal.

General man handling of the camera / movements

Attaching rollfilm backs etc

Using top hat lens boards



I have long forgotten the specs of my tripods and heads but I do know that they will more than comfortably support the kit that I use with them.
 
I use two, a Gitzo 1 series traveller + Arca P0 for everything up to my 5x4 kit (which can weigh around 3kg) and another Gitzo 3 series + Manfrotto 229 head for my 10x8, which pushes 7kg once it's set up. Technically the 1 series and P0 can hold (legs are rated to about 10kg and the head for 20kg) it but the sheer size of the camera means there's a lot of leverage working on the ball head once the standards are racked out. Gitzos go on sale often so keep an eye out.
 
At the risk of spreading further confusion, could I perhaps suggest choosing your preferred quick release plate at the outset? The photo below shows the big Manfrotto hexagonal plate I use with the old and heavy wholeplate Kodak, while the others are the Manfrotto 229(?) and the Arca type. I had read quite a few recommendations for the Arca type, so I bought a Benro Tortoise without a centre column last year to be used alongside my older Manfrotto tripods. I'm afraid the Arca plate and head doesn't feel right to me, and it's a niggle when using the Bronica SQ or the Ebony 5x4, although perfectly sound once it's definitely in place. The hexagonal plate requires the head on the heavy Manfrotto 055, but then the Kodak is sufficiently heavy that I'd not be carrying it any distance.

20230123_093029-tp.jpg
 
You can get larger Arca style plates and the Kessler Kwik Stand XL (https://kesslercrane.com/products/kwik-stand-xl) is particularly good for 8x10s.

On the Manfrotto hex side there's the 030L (big 100x100mm square with a hex plate fitting) and the 030 Universal (same length but narrower than the 030L. more like 60x100mm). I use those for my 8x10s and they're great - hard to find but I set up a search on eBay to alert me. The standard hex plates work well too and can easily handle 5x4.
 
I have a Manfrotto 074B tripod with a monster 3-axis Manfrotto head, heavy and very rigid, and a Berlebach, light and equally rigid, I've fitted its levelling head with a Manfrotto attachment. The Manfrotto 074B gives maximum versatility, in terms of movements, so this is the one I use most of all, The Berlebach goes on holiday with me.

I use the Manfrotto hexagonal plate for everything. I tried the rectangular plate, because I bought a geared head, but found the rectangular head unsatisfactory, I'm not saying the hex plate is fantastic, but it works with my 35mm, medium format and large format cameras (excepting the largest, the Kodak Specialist, which has its own tripod).

I also have an aluminium Linhof tripod which seems a bit insubstantial and a Bolex aluminium tripod with a levelling head and Hollywood tilt attachment. Also video tripod with a fluid head and dolly.

Too many tripods?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top