Ultimate Image Quality - A Warning

[@robertwilson6144]

Been down that rabbit hole! I once spent over a year obsessed with a certain image of moonrise over a lake - could only shoot it one day each month, dealt with weather, the shifting angles through the solar year, the exposure problems of such a high contrast etc. When I finally developed my 4x5 film and had the image that had been in my head ever since I first saw that moonrise, it was like a giant burden had lifted. I sold the camera and enlarger after that…

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's a great story.

[@WickBeavers]

But didn’t you mean “lunar year”?

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

lol

[@reusedisland1904]

And without being rude, would you say it was an unhealthy obsession, or a great vision, that you pursued with zeal? … ‘a great burden lifted’ sounds like you were glad to have put it behind you. Is there any way one could have a look at a facsimile of your cherished creation? I’m serious! I too have the personality that can get ‘hooked’, and I don’t want to get hooked onto something that one finally perceives as futile. If you did so much work, it must be worth sharing n- or is it? What do you think about it in retrospect? It might be very healthy for you to share the picture, and the compelling narrative behind it. Please share it - to protect us all. Maybe even the host of this channel will display it for you. Thank you

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Worth considering if there's a file.

[@WillN2Go1]

I've done this for fifty years as well. Don't have the same credits... So with respect: 1. Don't bother with a 35mm SLR, the shutter lag is too slow if you shoot people or any action, like a wink -- you're more likely to miss it. The Leica has a leaf shutter, almost zero lag. Much better. (If you've inherited a camera... sure use it.) 2. Two and a quarter 6x6 and 6x7cm I wouldn't use a twin lens reflex, works too slow. Get a Pentax 6x7 or something that you can work more quickly. At this point you're not trying to catch winks, fleeting emotions, action of any kind. Good quality negatives. 3. If you do want rich B&W prints, use a tripod, or practice and get steady. 4. 4x5 and 8x10. These are terrific. I've shot thousands of 4x5 and 8x10 transparencies. Slow working, but you get good with practice. In 1988 I shot 4x5 hand held off a boat on the Yangtze in the Three Gorges Rapids in China . I managed a few good images. 8x10 contact prints are wonderful. Study Edward Weston. Best is to shoot with the highest quality digital camera you can get and get a top quality inkjet printer that will print B&W. They can do everything I can much faster, and the only thing it can't do better than me in my darkroom is slightly blur an enlargement for 10% of the exposure. This eliminates the grain and surface image texture -- now you're looking at an image, not a piece of paper. If you're young what you're likely really after is not 'film' so much as slowing down and being more deliberate. Another thing about B&W film. There are basically two kinds of developers. D76 types which process the entire image equally, and compensating developers, some were called 'Pyro'. Compensating developers will develop an area of the negative until the developer exhausts itself, but continue developing other areas. This gives you a more constrained range of tones that is much easier to print in the darkroom. Bright areas, sky, are usually the densest on a negative. So Pyro will take them to a point and stop, but shadow areas, that are the thinnest on a negative will continue developing bringing up detail in the shadows. Weston never used a light meter, he used Pryo and experience. If you look at B&W images from the 1960s a lot of the skies are blown out white and instead of detail in the shadows it's black. (This is of course an over simplification.) I would NOT recommend setting up an entire darkroom or spending thousands of dollars to shoot film. It's a lot more work, you'll miss a lot more images from mistakes you won't know about until you process the film. (I use to have a nightmare where I'd go to the photo lab and the film would be so bad I'd start throwing up. Made plenty of mistakes never puked. Back in the day it was a pig in a poke until that film got processed.) Instead form a community, put together a darkroom and share it, inviting in new people as others drop out. If you're in Los Angeles I'd be happy to help. And a lot of the really highly technical tricks I used to shoot film (I photographed a lot of very old paintings) like flashing the film, or always flashing the paper in the darkroom, you can easily do in Lightroom. And my Nikon D850 has a range of I think 15 stops. Transparency (slide) film had a range of 7 stops. 5 stops under or over was D max Black, or pure white, B&W and color negative film had more range. (Doug Wall $500k a print, saying that Kodak color neg film is better than digital - shows you how little he knows.) Margin of error for color transparency was less than half a stop, but 2/3rds of stop was usually okay for most things. (And it's not just reading the meter, compensating for lens extension, filters, reiprocity failure, etc... it's different depending on light or dark the subject is.) With my Nikon D850 I can underexpose, get a black image and then dial in a reasonable exposure that's a bit flat and grainy, but it's there. Too try this I had to do it on purpose because light meters in good digital cameras are better than Ansel Adams ever was. I'm sure he'd agree. But he'd point out that they lack judgement,. However, as you can preview every shot, that's easy to fix. Hope this helps.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Thanks for contributing. Glad you're enjoying the videos.

[@Kitsaplorax]

I can't edit digitally. My hands are toast after 30+ years of data entry and coding. Can't hold a modern digital or use a mouse. Film works fine with workarounds.

[@WillN2Go1]

@@Kitsaplorax Tough break, but you've made it an opportunity. I'm not against film, I have so much film information in my head.... It's just that film is a lot more work. I do know that in the past 20 years my toned archival silver prints have gone up in value because they're now rarer. (I made a film/Type 55 Polaroid/ exposure slide rule, with filter factors, lens extension and reciprocity failure. A photo of it would explain everything. If you have any issues with any of this. With 4x5, and especially 8x10 neg/trans, extension calcs were frequent. btw the best lenses I ever owned were Nikons without shutters, used by printing shops. They went digital when these lenses were still new. Absolutely amazing, Bought them on E bay for a couple hundred bucks. Used them shooting art. I'd just turn off the modeling lights, an then pop the flash 4 to 20+ times, sometimes I'd cover the lens while the packs were re charging. ) I started doing Photoshop in 1992 on a Mac IIci, 500mg harddrive. Took half an hour to do anything and then an undo, do it again. First major job took over a month, read 5 books waiting for the thermometers to crawl, but made a great image. I got so frustrated with the computer randomly crashing, I went back into the darkroom where whatever it was I could fix it. Made a motorized tray rocker, put a yellow bug bulb with a #0 MG filter in a black 'snoot' on the ceiling -- this would give a minimal exposure to the paper that if it was white, it would stay white, but any detail... would come out. If I was going to do B&W film again I would of course use compensating developers, but I would do tests to see what the minimum amount of agitation would not cause problems. I'd also want to expand my darkroom to make larger prints, and have a separate area for wash/tone/wash dry, flatten and mount.. And I'd want to hire assistants to do most of it. I listened to hundreds of audiobooks on cassette and then CDs. Still have many good prints I never tire of. And if anyone gets a Besseler Enlarger (I had a 45XL...) it's probably not calibrated. Make a neg, or draw concentric circles for the net stage of the enlarger, Put a mirror on the base (paper stage). I think I had concentric circles on that too. Then do whatever you have to to align them. Then make sure the lens is also aligned. A level, even a digital level isn't enough but it'll be close. (I 've still got all my DIY tools to do this . if there's nothing online I can make better instructions. And if anyone in Southern California wants to make a video. I can set up my Besseler .) I also replaced the Color light head with a DIY to get even light across the neg.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Sure sounds like you're having fun out there.

[@jeremykeller211]

"Take it to the lab." "Scan it" No! Be a film photographer. Do it yourself!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

You're right, plus it's way for fun.

[@nick4506]

my grandad died young long before i was born and that basement film lab still smells like cancer. I ain't touching developer chemicles.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's sad to hear about your grandad. Have a great week!

[@antona7247]

Ansel Adams didn’t print all of his work, was he less of a photographer at those times?

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

None of this matters. Enjoy what you enjoy. It's the user experience that I'm looking for.

[@HikingwiththeBlindBoomer]

I was bitten in my 20s when 4x5 was only 25 cents per negative. I borrowed everything. Camera, lens, film holders, enlarger. I was😮astounded that I could see the nails in the building. But I quickly realized that I couldn’t follow down that rabbit hole. But I learned so much. It was😅 very much worth it.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

It's a great way to learn photography if you have enough time.

[@alphascorpii185]

If by "quality", you mean definition, yes, may be large format is the answer. But that's all purely technical, if we speak about art, no matter the camera, the format, the only things that count is the photographer and ... AND ... the people who looks at the picture.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's the great thing about art. There's something for everybody.

[@lohikarhu734]

I felt the initial obsession, even with 35 mm, when you develop your film, and print yourself... 3 AM, suddenly realised you were printing all night... I do have a 4x5 Chromega enlarger, with 3 Rodenstock lenses.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

You might have to give it a go. Try and borrow a 4x5, or go out with a friend who has one, and shoot a couple of frames. Even if it's an old 'pepper' from the fridge that's all twisted up. Just to get a couple negatives to play with.

[@keithwiebe1787]

I'm in the process of scanning 1000s of medium format film and even some 4x5 film. Using my Canon R8 with 50 macro lens to do it. The 4x5 could be scanned with a flatbed scanner but really the digital scan is good enough. I really think my R8 scans of medium mat exceed the resolution of any of my medium format pics anyway. The 4x5 scan will show more detail than a 16x20 print on the wall (or even up close). I see no reason for anything other than digital these days.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

It sounds like you've found a great solution. Keep enjoying it.

[@davyboyo]

As a photographer using both digital and analog, my two cents is that while I do believe film still trumps digital in terms of absolute quality where colour and image aesthetic are concerned, the difference isn't great enough to make or break a good photograph. It's mostly immaterial. As far as I see it, film is only worth it today if you go completely hands on and do your own process and printing work. The experience is special and the final output will be excellent if you learn the ropes.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, you're right.

[@TucsonAnalogWorkshop]

Even back in the 90s, when digital was in its infancy, hearing the "digital vs. film" arguments never felt very informative or productive a comparison to me. Neither did the ever so repeated claim that content matters more than all else. Digital is a computational art while film is tactile/chemical (among other things). If the end product, an image, were the only goal, there would be no ongoing interest in film. (Certainly that is the still the reality for 'practical' purposes). Yet film persists, thanks to strengths that were so recently regarded as distasteful, fatal weaknesses--it's ability to be 'neither one nor zero", its openness to chance--it's flaws--for lack of a better term. These are liberating qualities to embrace, especially for a young generation whose life is now oppressively intertwined with computers. (And some of us older people never abandoned film.) I expect film is not going away any time in the foreseeable future. 20 years ago I would not have said that with the same certainty.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I think film is here to say. Digital is great and I loved my years working at Sony, but I like film more.

[@Cracky003]

​@@stillshootinginblackandwhiteit could be here to stay. I would be more interested if there were 35mm options that were, under $1,500, in functionally sound condition, and we're an interchangeable lens system. As it stands there are Nikon Fs and Canon Eos, but mostly sticky now, Leica, but too expensive for having not shot film in 20 years. What else is there? 35 year old consumer cameras in various states of disrepair, and no parts still made, or cheap disposable quality licensed kodaks... I suppose it will live on as a rich man's hobby, but I wonder how much of that is for the art, and how much is for the "exclusivity" of the medium.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I think there are still some nice FM2's around and likely some mint F3's that won't set you back too much.

[@javixo1997]

People would be surprised of how much information you can get out of a 6x7 Ektar frame. Basically grainless prints up to 40 inches wide and still full of details

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, I'm sure you're right.

[@richardvallonjr.6716]

when T-Grained film was introduced it made 35mm as detailed as medium format with older films- in other words- everything was not a format up in resolution and less grain. Also look at Westons 8x10 work developed in Pyro- you can see grain in the flat areas. The new Pyro on newer films allows this rez or better from Medium format. of course- better lenses matter.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

The quality has never been better than it is right now, that's for sure. Not only better equipment and supplies but great knowledge is available if you read the books.

[@86BBUB]

Images rarely fail due to a lack of "image quality". They fail because they are not emotive. Most people would rather see an interesting 35mm image than a boring 8x10 image.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes you're right. Sometimes photographers think a simple headshot is a great photo.. because of all the extra work it was to shoot it. It's still just a headshot.

[@robbase-f6x]

take a look at some actual Irving Penn platinum prints - then tell me if you feel the same way

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

They're great photos, and platinum prints are often nicer than silver prints, but they're not great photos just because they were shot on LF. He was a great photographer. I hear there's a giant show of his opening in San Francisco this spring.

[@86BBUB]

I have been an avid NYC photographer for close to sixty years. There is no photographer worth mentioning whose work I have not had the opportunity to enjoy. Content is king.@@robbase-f6x

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I think most people would agree.

[@paulatterby7507]

I use an Ebony for landscapes, along with 35mm, medium format and digital. I remember years ago a digital shooter coming over to me one morning and excitedly telling me he had taken 300 pictures, I had used 2 frames! In fact I never carry more than 4 sheets at any time. Nothing but nothing beats viewing an image on a large format camera screen.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes you are so right. Actually 8x10 is easier than 4x5 for that same reason, the ground glass is so much larger. I'm sure you're having a blast with the Ebony camera. They are wonderful.

[@WickBeavers]

You don’t need to carry any film for that.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Digital and film are both great, just different, and we have the gift of choosing the one we want to play with.

[@Kitsaplorax]

Unless it is viewing a film transparency that's 8x10.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

You'll aways remember your first time, processing an 8x10 tranny and watching it come out of the tube!!

[@boatman222345]

Excellent overall view of the pros and cons of large format photography. I would add, however, that thinking that moving to large format will automatically improve the quality of your prints is a big mistake. I've seen prints made by photographers using top quality 8x10 cameras and lenses that pale in comparison to those I've made while shooting with entry level 8MP digital cameras. I have also seen prints made from 35mm negatives that compare favorably with the work done by Ansel Adams. Finally, Ansel and Edward Weston's superb print quality was not simply the result of using large format cameras, it was the result of a complete mastery of the photographic process. And sadly you can't buy that at your local camera store.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

It's content that matters, I agree, but sometimes people think they've got amazing quality as well, but really they just haven't seen amazing yet.

[@boatman222345]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite I have not only seen Ansel Adam's prints I actually met him once and I had a friend who worked for Ansel and his wife for years. I also attended showings of Edward Weston's work at a small gallery in Monterey in the early 1970s and so am familiar with his work as well. And while I do not in any way wish to diminish the very high quality of their prints I have also seen prints made from 35 mm negatives that, at least in smaller sizes, come pretty darn close to matching that quality. The real issue here, however, is the idea that simply switching to a larger format will somehow magically transform the "technical" quality of your prints. Some years ago there was an ex CBS talking head who lived on the island where I live in Maine. Someone apparently convinced him that buying an expensive 5x7" camera would allow him to make superior images and so off he went. One year and thousands of dollars later the prints he had created compared unfavorably with images I made when first entering the world of digital with the purchase of a used Olympus 8 MP E300 camera equipped with a cheap kit zoom lens. And although his subject matter and composition were inane what really struck me was the poor tonal quality and grainess of the prints, especially considering the format size. The motto of the story is "Bigger Can Better If Ya Know What Ya Doing" otherwise skip large format cameras because you simply can not buy better quality you have to earn it.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Eventually I'll have made all the mistakes and will finally know what I doing, or at least what not to do!

[@tonysantophotography]

Very interesting discussion. I was first “bitten” in 2009 and have been totally immersed since. I started on 4x5 and was enticed by 8x10. Now I’m completely addicted to 8x10. I have a love-frustration relationship with my camera. 😎

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yeah, so did I. Honestly the Ebony 810 was the finest camera I ever used. Although few people have heard of them!!

[@andyvan5692]

great arguments for not doing it, but one point, if you shoot MF backs in a LF camera, then you use ONE body/lens/focus accessories for multiple formats, which may be a saving of money, as you don't have to carry around 4,5 or 6 cameras, just to get the negative size you desire, just get a 6x7cm; 6x9 or something like a SINAR vario /zoom back (multi-format 6x4.5-6x12); You also have a T\S lens with EVERY lens, as the standards have movements, also a LARGE focus screen (for those with vision problems), so making focussing and composing a lot easier.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yeah, that could work too. As long as we're all having fun out there.

[@aheadachewithpictures]

I think I need to drag my dad's old 4x5 out and get addicted, I thought I'd be happy with 6x9 but I need more

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

It's never enough, lol.

[@PanAmStyle]

I disagree on “don’t buy a 4x5”. Yes, 8x10 is a much better choice for contact printing but the expense and hassle is not insignificant for someone coming from roll films. 6x7 and 6x9 give quality *approaching* 4x5, but … you miss two essential ingredients. 1. Film in sheets. To be able to process one or two exposures and learn the zone system (or at least precision exposure and development) is critical to technical improvement. 2. Flexible image composition. Which roll film cameras feature built-in close-up and perspective controls? None! There are a few that might get close, such as the Rolleiflex SL series, but those are expensive and far more mechanically complex - in other words, expensive to service. Yes, 4x5 is “only” an entry drug to large format, but it is more financially accessible and the quality is very good. A 4x5 enlarger kit is generally MUCH cheaper than an 8x10 enlarger and more manageable. I went from a Toyo 45A field camera with Fujinon lenses to a Chamonix 45N-2. I bought the Chamonix because it was both more capable and flexible than the Toyo and it was half the weight. As I aged and my mobility disability became more a hindrance, limiting the weight of my kit became more critical. Have I ever wanted an 8x10 kit? Of course! I would use it for studio work where weight and portability is not really an issue. And I would focus on 8x10 platinum and platinum/palladium contact prints. All I need is a big lottery win to build the studio and buy the gear and supplies 😂

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I hear you, I'm waiting on the lottery numbers myself. The Chamonix units are nice. Glad to hear you have one.

[@scottnj2503]

Seeing you with the field cameras brings strong feelings of nostalgia. As a young man in the 70s, with desires to become a professional photographer (didn't happen), I strived to learn Ansel Adams Zones system, finding marginal success. My high school had professional level photography studio and dark room with cameras from 35mm to 4x5 view cameras and Pentax 6x7 SLR. Oh, how I loved the mid and large formats. Taking as spot meter and the 4x5 or 6x7, out in the field, I explored the world of hidef B&W photography. These decades later, I hear thew sirens call of the rabbit hole. Budget and time don't permit. Still thanks for the post.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Hey Scott, glad you enjoyed it. There's still time.

[@scottnj2503]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite I have pulled out my Nikon F3 kit. It's not large format but feels good.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I was shooting with the F3 yesterday. Enjoy it, it's a fun camera to use.

[@4CardsMan]

I wasted some time and materials on the zone system and worked out exposure late using an incident meter.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I never did get the zone system working for me either.

[@GaryNylander]

Great points in your video, Rob. As for shooting 4x5 large format, a few things going for it is availability of related gear like; lenses, cameras, film holders and film processing equipment. I would think film is easier to find where 5x7 film might be more difficult to find. Plus not quite as expensive during the learning curve.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Everyone actually learns to 4x5, although 810 is easier. Year's ago you could get 4x5 instant film which shortened the learning curve a lot.

[@CalumetVideo]

Your channel is my favorite photography channel! I agree with all of your points. I have been doing photography for over 30 years! I have used Rolleiflex, Mamiya TLR’s, Mamiya RB67, Hasselblad and Fuji GW690. I had sold the Mamiya C330S and kept the Rolleiflex. I still use the Rolleiflex, Hasselblad 500CM, Mamiya RB67 and Fuji GW690. It is definitely a rabbit hole! I also have the Tachihara 4x5 and Toyo 45A 4x5. I find that there is not much advantage of 4x5 over 6x7 or 6x9, the aspect ratio and quality are about the same. The only thing I use the 4x5 for is when I need perspective control in shooting still life. I think large format in general is expensive and way too involved for most work. I live in the cold Midwest and my cameras see very little use during the winter months.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Those are good points. We have a season of photography where I live as well, plus darkroom season in the winter.

[@DannerPlace]

Fascinating. I've retired 6 month ago, dedicating myself to B&W silver-gelatin work. Getting pleasing results from 6x7, and still improving my darkroom craft. Your channel is very motivating.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad that you're finding the videos interesting.

[@rogerbotting3459]

Rob and I worked at the same newspaper back in the 80’s . The paper recently shut down. Rabbit hole of the next camera, at that time, was solved by the miserable pay cheques. I would say, use what you have and learn to get everything you can out of t. You wouldn’t believe the quality you can get by just learning how to use what you have.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Wow, I didn't know the paper shut down. I should read the news more. Barry Gray said the Spec is down to one photographer. I think we had 12 in the photo department when I was there.

[@lohikarhu734]

I found that I needed to get a bit more flexibility, vs. 4x5, I got a Pentax 67, and it's a wonderful step up vs. 35 mm, especially on 50 or 100 ISO.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, the 67 is a great format. Every one needs to draw their own line in the sand. ... how large a negative they need, how much they want to carry, printing or scanning, it all becomes part of the cocktail of photography... and of course costs are an issue for many people.

[@trondsi]

I actually had a very interesting experience with 4x5 once. I bought slide film sheets and a developing kit, went out shooting in the morning, and then straight home and developed within a few hours. I got some of that polaroid feeling of getting my physical images almost immediately, only very high quality. It was a bit hassle but I will definitely do it again.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Great, you're having fun with photography!!

[@letmebereal]

Its a great obsession. Just dont blow your budget. It dont matter what type of camera you shoot(apart from phones) photography is a what gear can I buy next hobby. One thing since i moved from digital to medium format (mostly) I feel more content with my camera and feel less of a need to try to keep up with the latest greatest expensive digital camera. I at the moment shooting Fujica gw690/Zeiss 6x6/ and of course Holga.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Nice, keeping it fun. Once I quit working for Sony, I stopped looking at digital gear. Not even sure what the current models are.

[@richardsimms251]

You are extremely educational. This is a wonderful channel. Thank you. RS. Canada

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Thanks. Glad you're enjoying it.

[@IraGardner]

Any chance you attended Spokane Falls Community College? The curriculum you described sounds exactly like my experience back in 88-89. Loved your presentation.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

No I went to Sheridan College, (now Sheridan University) in Oakville Canada. That was a long time ago. lol

[@rogerharrison4316]

Great to get your insight, some very wise words there. I jumped down the 10x8 rabbit hole 5 years ago. I currently have three 10x8 cameras, including a Deardorff. The main motivation for me was to make palladium prints directly from film negatives, but I recently came across a De Vere 5108 which was a lot cheaper than they normally go for, so I bought it, and now I have the option of making enlargements if I want to. You're quite right, it is an unhealthy obsession (financially, anyway) but one that I thoroughly enjoy. I do still enjoy taking photos with my Rolleiflex and 35mm gear though.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I guess I'm not as crazy as people think. Glad you're having fun!!

[@dewindoethdwl2798]

Totally agree. My Mamiya 645 is a treasured possession for B&W. Doing my own processing and printing is totally absorbing. I can’t print larger than A4 with my kit but the clarity and sharpness is staggering when I hit things right. As I approach retirement I’ve started building a large camera and exploring making my own glass plates. Hard work, several failures but it will be worth while.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Fail, learn, repeat. Have fun doing it.

[@Narsuitus]

While I was in college, I worked at a photo studio where I used a large format vaccume back camera that was built into a wall that separated the room where the subject was located from the room that served as a darkroom and the inside of the camera. I loved the image quality of those 11x14 and larger images. However, 4x5 and 8x10 inches is the largest I shoot for my personal work. On the other hand, my 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, and 6x12cm medium format images are not as good as my 4x5 inch and 8x10 inch images, but I am very satisfied with the image quality of my medium format film cameras.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, large format is wonderful in the studio. Tougher in the field. If I just shot studio still life, I would shoot on 8x10. Now I'm happy with the MF!!

[@robbiemer8178]

I might have "needed" this warning a few years ago... But. I started with 35mm in the mid 70s and have just kept on. But photography has always been a hobby, I honestly never wanted to pursue it as a career. That also meant, for me, that I couldn't afford the best cameras--well until the mad rush to digital happened. kind of suddenly I could build a "serious" kit. And I also discovered the fun to be had with soviet medium format cameras. Then, a few years ago, several things happened that led me to 4x5. The Intrepid 4x5 camera began, the Stearman 4x5 daylight tank became available, the US dollar vs the UK pound was heavily in my favor, and I got a 4x5 enlarger for the cost of picking it up. The rabbit hole still calls me a little but, so far, I am resisting. So far. 4 years on and I am almost ready to add a second film stock. Still very happy with my single Fuji lens and the occasional pinhole lens use. One of the most appealing things about this hobby, for me, has been that it never feels like I will know it all, that I will continue to learn no matter how long I carry on. Your channel popping in my recommended feed this morning is one more step in the learning, thanks!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I'm glad that you're enjoying it. There's so many genre's of photography and so much to learn. So many mistakes not yet made, lol.

[@guidoverrept7120]

Thanks for story, interesting and motivating. I am shooting 4x5 and looking towards 8x10. What is your opinion about shooting, developing and then scanning and post processing digital? Thanks for you comment, Guido (Belgium)

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I think if you're going to scan, the extra hassle of 8x10 over 4x5 isn't worth it. Try 8x10 if you can borrow one before making the switch over. Hopefully someone around has a camera you can try.

[@besperus4475]

I started about the same time you did. I’m 72. As a kid I talked to Ansel Adams a few times. I understand where you are coming from one hundred percent. There are a number of other photographers I grew to love, maybe emulated. But it was more important to me to be original in whatever you chose to do. Large format take a devotion to an idea that could age a person in that search for perfection and quite the skill, technically and artistically to become satisfied with yourself. Film has always drawn me back to medium format as it has you. Large enough for acceptable results and compact enough to be easily accessible easy enough to use. Then there is digital That is a whole different world but it makes me wanting a simple manual camera and maybe a Weston light meter.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Have fun out there, it is supposed to be fun isn't it.

[@bearbb5]

I enjoyed hearing about your trip down the rabbit hole! First, let me say that I am not a professional; I only do photography for a hobby/fun. However, I know that rabbit hole well! When I was young, I started with 35 mm (had a few cameras, but eventually ended up with the Canon F1n and associated lenses), then picked up a Hasselblad 500 cm, and then bought my first 4x5 (Sinar F+). I must say that the Sinar was a great camera for work in the studio, but no way you want to carry that heavy beast around in the field. I had the opportunity to borrow an 8x10 Deardorff on a number of occasions, so I can sympathize with the strong attraction to the format. I eventually sold the Sinar an purchased a Wista 4x5 field camera - I really liked working with the Wista. Then life happened (Grad school, marriage, kids, etc.), so the cameras ended up in the closed for two decades. Kids left home for school, and the photography bug bit again... sold the old film gear and purchased my first digital (Fujifilm X-E2) and a few lenses... that lead to a second APC-sized sensor body... then I found myself going down the old rabbit hole again... Just purchased my second medium format digital camera. While I do miss film, there was really something magical about working with large format B&W, the convenience of digital wins at this phase in my life. I have my cameras, computer with Capture One and Lightroom, and Canon Pro 2000 printer (yeah, yeah, the rabbit hole). There is just something about making images that draws you in, and the trip down the rabbit hole is a familiar path. Thanks for sharing your story.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you're enjoying them. Having fun is the key as the spending never stops.

[@ronaldmoravec2692]

Been down a similar road, but the ultimate was a friends family lithography business. He went to R.I.T. in Rochester. I helped with an assignment where he had to make a halftone so went to the shop . The camera was a room and we were inside, lens was on a track and focused by electricity. Two lights at 45 degrees. Now Richard picks up a 24x30 film and places it over a hole in the room, takes the photo and then he processed it all inside the room. I still have my Zone 6 and half dozen lenses, but use Leica and nikon, digital and film. 4x5 tri x puts best 35 mm to shame.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's very interesting. They had huge cameras like that at the newspapers I worked at as well. Part of the press process.

[@risby1930]

Ahh the old days shooting mash potatoes for ice cream, with my 8x10. I'm an old guy and although I rarely lug an 8x10 around, I still enjoy shooting 4x5. I'm sure you would agree, a view camera or a good old Super Graphic makes a young photographer developed a certain amount of craftsmanship that is sorely missed today. Not to mention becoming proficient in the darkroom. I own all the digital stuff as well, (you gotta take care of your customers first), but when they need something special the film comes out. Enjoy your channel.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you're enjoying it. Keep having fun.

[@GreggObst]

That is very good advice and absolutely true. I started shooting film in 2012 after recovering from a long illness and quickly went up the chain from 35mm to medium format then added 4x5 monorails, 4x5/5x7, 4x10 and 8x10 field cameras. It very quickly gets crazy expensive, and film developing and scanning backlogs become unwieldy. I'm at a point where I don't really need all that quality since I'm not selling prints or making exhibition or gallery work so what is the point for me? I'm getting more than enough quality out of my 45-megapixel Nikon D850 DSLR with a full array of perspective correction lenses, so I don't really need all that large format gear anymore. I may sell off everything except for my Canham 4x10 and 5x7 very soon and I would only keep those two because I really enjoy using them in the field on occasion. Large format can be a very meditative and therapeutic thing to do, but also I tend to shoot the D850 in a very similar way to the large format, using the tilt-shift lenses and a Hoodman loop on the large screen on the back. If only I could turn the scren on my D850 upside down and backwards, I'd be absolutely sold on using it 100% of the time.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Both user experiences are good, they're just different.

[@peterhostettler-vf5qg]

Rob, wonderful discussion! I am now 65 years old and changed from medium format film (Making Plaubel and Mama RB 67) to Fujilm GFX 100s. Also in digital you could go ahead with ever more pixels and greater sensors - but at the end of the day, it is the take which is important. I am now entirely happy with what I have got and try to educate myself to use it to its best.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Keep having fun with it. When it stops being fun, switch it out.

[@tamassanta6819]

As far as I know, the resolution regarding the lines is better at the medium format lenses, than at the large format lenses, but the negatives are bigger at 4x5. What would you say, about the enlarging limits between the two size? Can I make larger enlargement of a negative taken with an average 4x5 lens than a negative taken with an average medium format lens? When I say larger, I mean without the image “falling apart” or “seeing the grain”. Approximately what is the maximum (print size) in medium format and In 4x5?

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

There's not really a maximum as everyone draws there own line in the sand. I think medium format lenses might be sharper than LF but with the additional enlargement the grain might become an issue. If I was hanging a print in my house, in black and white, I would expect to make a 4x6' print from either without issues. I went to Salgado's show in Toronto and the prints were about 8'. They had grain, but still looked amazing. I would have bought one too, if they weren't US$200K.

[@tamassanta6819]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite Thank you.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

; )

[@dpmedhurst]

That was fascinating. Great information from somebody who really knows what he is talking about after a lifetimes’ experience. Altogether rather rare in this world nowadays. Many, many thanks.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you're enjoying them!!

[@michaeljenner1795]

6.5x8.5" is full plate, had one but only used it a few times. I used 5x7 and 4x5 for years. I used medium format a lot, it's the best compromise for ease of use and quality of images IMHO. I would take multiple photos of a scene from different angles so that the 12 photos would make a whole image broken up like window panes. Before going digital I was using a Fuji 645 with the 60mm and color negative film. I loved the output, either making color enlargements or scanning and printing inkjet. Photography has been a lifelong source of inspiration. I'm still challenged and think about it every day. I started shooting in 1970 and I'm still at it. My friend and I used to use his banquet camera. He'd get Plus-X aerial film and cut it and roll it in black paper just before heading out to shoot. It's all very heady stuff. I worked in a camera store and taught college photo for twenty-five years. It's been a wonderful ride.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

It's such a great hobby, and so fulfilling!!

[@anotherguycalledsmith]

Thank you so much, you won yourself a new subscriber ;-) @19:00 What's healthy for me, is to learn how ”real“ photography works in times of digital cameras and ”vintage filters“ tortured onto smartphone images… This is why I started collecting _Ica Dresden_ and pre-war _Zeiss Ikon_ cameras - and stick with the medium format (9×12 cm sheets and 120 roll-film). I still need to develop all the skills that are normal for a professional photographer - and the whole learning process is rather long and slow… I am just not shooting enough to have the results quick enough and need to keep track of all my shots (which film and settings in which camera) to make sure that there will be a learning curve and any progress at all ;-) Yes, I would have loved to attend one of your _large format_ courses you gave years ago… - and I am looking forward to detecting your content here on KZbin now ;-)

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you liked it. There is so much to learn.... so many mistakes still to make.

[@anotherguycalledsmith]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite Mistakes? From somebody like you ;-) Your insights are _very_ encouraging for me, thanks a lot!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Fail, learn, repeat... eventually you run out of mistakes to make... at least that's what I'm hoping for.

[@anotherguycalledsmith]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite You have a friendly way of teaching and are realistic about the trickiness of this process ;-)

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Thanks.

[@dominikwojtarowicz3423]

I just found this channel while researching Hasselblad cameras and was pleasantly surprised to see Rob doing this. I bought my second 4x5 camera from Rob (an Ebony) and the rabbit hole is totally a thing. I do wish I bought an 8x10 back when everyone was selling off their gear as the "look" of large format 8x10 can't be simulated with anything digital even if high end digital can resolve more details. Because I became very interested in color, shooting film is less appealing due to the need for drum scanning and a lot of color control in order to create great prints. People who use flatbed scanners for color film work are dabbling at best, and 99% of photographers don't have the money or commitment to go through a process like Christopher Burkett or others do in order to get amazing (and large) color prints from film. Anyway, awesome to see you doing youtube Rob, I miss the get-togethers you used to host.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Those were fun times. Glad you found the channel.

[@4CardsMan]

I owned 3 Hasselblads plus an Arca-Swiss 6x7/9. But the hassle of sheet film holders and heavy tripods pushed me back. I made a lot of hand-held photographs with the Hasselblads which I still treasure. Thanks for the video.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you liked it, for most people MF is the way to go. It is for me.

[@jamesmoore9511]

After 50+ years shooting, developing and printing I've settled on Large format 4x5, half plate 5x7 and 4x10 with Kodak Ektars and wollensak Apo Raptars. Mostly x-ray film until I find exactly the scene I want. Then it's Ilford FP4+ to Flextight Precission II scanning and print a beautiful print the exact size I want. Done lots of 8x10 contact printing also. Nice thoughts on large format though thanks.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you found it interesting.

[@Stop4MotionMakr]

I started crawling down the large format rabbit hole when I started doing kallitypes, a cheaper but almost identical cousin of platinum print. I started with digital negatives from ink jet printers and that was ok for a while. But then I bought a carbon transfer print from Borut Peterlin, and when I received it, I was completely blown away by the sheer resolution. That really was when the bug bit me and nothing from 35mm or digital could ever hold a light to it anymore. I bought an intrepid 5x7, but commercial film was just too expensive so I made my own emulsion from scratch and made glass plates to shoot with. then I learnt how to make silver gelatine tintypes, and turned it into an entire project where I shot instant portraits live on a concert ground. Then 5x7 felt a little constrained, and I decided to buy a Zone VI 8x10. Now I am shooting 8x10 glass plates, making kallitypes and carbon prints on glass, and of course, 8x10 tintypes. But I got to say, I think the very pinnacle of photographic viewing experience, in my opinion, is an 8x10 silver gelatine ambrotype. The sheer resolution, it is completely smooth and the tonal range is simply unbelievable. There is a such a depth to the image it is an experience completely ummatched by anything I've seen before doing large format I have my sight on 8x10 daguerreotype next. I love large format.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I'm not sure I've ever seen an 8x10 ambrotype!!

[@TomRaneyMaker]

It's also possible that the film "rabbit hole" is less fanatical than the digital one - endless software plugins and styles to choose from, not to mention large initial investments of many thousands of dollars in gear to both capture and store your images. The initial investments for large format like a 4x5 is well under $500. It then just begins a marginal cost expense for film, processing and printing. Even a few hundred sheets of film and processing wouldn't approach the "cost to play" of a good digital setup.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Those are good points. Plus it get's you off the computer and out shooting.

[@sgroadie6367]

I think 4x5 is the best solution. Many more lenses than 8x10, especially if you need movements.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, and some of those lenses are so nice, and less costly than anything for a hasselblad would be.

[@puppetyr]

Agreed. I think 4x5 is probably the best compromise. There is a bigger choice of sheet films available in that format than larger sizes, apart from anything else. I also still think the inherent image quality jump from 6x7 or 6x9 to 4x5 is significant enough to warrant the extra effort involved. The enormous power of camera movements also should not be disregarded, as tilt-shift lenses for smaller systems are a very pale imitation.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

The great thing is that we have so many options, and each photographer can find his own answers.

[@lohikarhu734]

Quality...hmmm ... Rodenstock 180 macro, 4x5 Velvia 50... Not bad, I think? I remember shooting photos of a race car engine with that combination, with Arca Swiss camera.... You could read the manufacturer markings on the heads of Philips screws!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Those German LF lenses were so great. I had a couple when I shot 4x5 but when I switched to 8x10 I went for the less costly models from Japan. The problem with my photos could never be blamed on any of the lenses I used. lol.

[@Paul020]

Here's a question. Is it more cost effective to shoot 11x14 or 16x20 vs trying to find and deal with an 8x10 enlarger ?

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I think an enlarger is less costly. I wouldn't say cheaper because none of it is really cheap, but you can find a used 8x10 enlarger for $500 which wouldn't buy much 16x20 film.

[@Paul020]

​@@stillshootinginblackandwhiteok, where do you live ? $500 !

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

lol, surprising that's what I paid for my 8x10 enlarger off ebay. Not too many at that price I guess. I live north of Toronto.

[@PeterofCanada]

I enjoy 5x7 and 8x10 but I don't contact print. I scan the LF negs and spend days on Lightroom and Photoshop, then print on a big Canon pigment printer. Sometimes I print on clear film to contact print Platinum Palladium. A lot of satisfaction. Nice video. Thanks for sharing!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I'm glad you enjoy it. I'll end up switching to Platinum printing one day. I'm sure my next house will be a downsize and have no darkroom so I'm guessing I'll get some type of UV burner and learn about printing with it. For now I'm enjoying the darkroom but I know I won't have one forever.

[@PeterofCanada]

​​@stillshootinginblackandwhite I had a similar experience in university, doing B+W for the first year, dragging a Cambo with a heavy wooden tripod around everywhere. Who said photography wasn't a physical activity? Hehe... Honestly, I don't miss dodging and burning on an enlarger. Give me a Wacom tablet and pen any day. Glad I found your channel. Keep it up!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yeah, those are good points.

[@c.augustin]

My advice would be: Don't go LF for image quality, you can get it much easier and cheaper with 60+ MP digital cameras (think of Fuji GFX 100)! Yes, less "tactile" process, but image quality is more than enough even for humongous prints. But if you're after all the movements - then LF becomes a choice, even in 4x5! And then there's pinhole photography, and there size *does* matter. Like, it matters a lot. This is what got me to succumb to the LF virus (even though the look of 6x9 pinhole would be prefect for me, getting a camera with all the movements is far outside my budget) … 5x7? Hard to get film in this size, not much choice, and more expensive. Cameras are harder to come by, and are also more expensive. Interesting format, though (it's close to our European A sizes in proportion, being 1:1.4 instead of 1:1.414). Thought about it, but my experience with the quite affordable Intrepid cameras is rather bad.

[@dct124]

Dude there's no comparison. Large format prints have a mp eq. of some 1500mp 😅 it's not remotely close in image quality. 35mm film alone can pull 87mp of detail. You need 500mp before you even get to 4x5 eq. Digital you don't even need more than 2mp. There's literally nothing you're going to do with more than 2mp in the digital world. It's not until you come to print where high mp matters. The reason for high mp in digital is to crop. If you knew what you were shooting, and knew you weren't going to need to crop, and the image was going straight to online all you need is 2mp or less. Digital is faster, but higher quality? No. And that's what he's talking about. Higher quality. If you've never been to a gallery to see large prints, maybe it's about time you purchase a ticket. You'd need to shoot over 10x Hassleblad 100mp images to get close to 8x10 quality.

[@dct124]

8x10 film is readily available on Amazon, B&H, China, Japan, and many other online sources. The cost is offset if you're a professional, not a hobbyist.

[@c.augustin]

@@dct124 I was talking about 5x7!

[@c.augustin]

@@dct124 In theory you can have more resolution with LF than with a 100 MP MF sensor - if you have incredibly good LF lenses and high resolution film, and only if you go B&W (since the color clouds of color film are much larger than the silver particles of B&W film). In practice, a 100 MP file can be printed incredibly large and still look tack sharp and detailed (I've seen 100 MP shots at around 3 x 2 meters/yards in a gallery, and they were very impressive even viewed from half a meter/yard distance). If you like to look on your 8x10 prints with a microscope - well, go ahead! And if you mean viewing on screen by "digital" - 4K monitors have around 8 MP, and it does make a huge difference if you view lower res images on one of those …

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I'm only comparing 35mm, MF and Large Format films. Large Format beats the other two in most cases. Digital might be better than any of those but I'm only considering film and darkroom work. If I made digital prints instead of darkroom prints, I would shoot digital capture.

[@chromakeyblue]

I enjoyed your presentation immensely, absolutely enlightening! Maybe it will solve my problem. I am trying to solve a photographic assignment issue: I have a dear friend that has some vintage theatrical posters approximately 36 inches high and approximately 24 inches wide. He also has some vintage newspapers. He wants me to photograph them for print reproduction. What and how would you tackle this. I have a Canon R. Any help will be so much appreciated. By the way, you mentioned Rochester; I hung out for years in Dick Casey’s Cameras in Las Vegas, who was from Rochester.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

If they plan to use them in a book, then shoot them with the highest rez digital you can use. If you just want them reproduced, then two lights are needed, as on a copy stand. It you want a more artist look to the photos... some posters rolled up in the background or with additional props, then you'll need to figure out what type of look to the lighting, again on digital.

[@yasumotonoboru]

You are right, that Rabbit hole is bottomless. I shoot Wet Plate on 5x7 and film up to 4x5, which I think is the maximum size still affordable for a mere mortal. I do have a larger - 10x12 - camera, but am still reluctant to use it. Instead, I lately acquired a 4x5 Graflex SLR with a couple of MagBags and I am excited to try that one out. The problem with large format SLRs if of course that the shortest focal length you can use is about 190mm...

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That sounds like a lot of fun though. Enjoy the ride.

[@cinnamon--girl]

Interesting perspective. I still enjoy shooting my Ebony 4x5 alongside medium format digital and film. And like you, I, too, am a retired commercial photographer, but I have never thought to stop being a photographer. It is my lifestyle. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you're enjoying them!!

[@arthuraero]

I enjoyed your talk. I can relate to going down the rabbit hole...I shoot mostly digital for travel and film for fun. 35mm, medium format and some 4x5 - I have an Ebony - great camera, and a bunch of used lenses. I took a few workshops with Per Volquartz and Steve Simmons who you probably know. I wasn't a professional photographer but since I retired I've had time to take more photos. Film has gotten very expensive in the past few years.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yeah, Per was a great guy. We did a couple road trips together years ago.

[@monochromebluess]

Interesting review. Thanks. I have never used or indeed been tempted to use Large Format cameras. Until now …..

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's why I included the warning.... lol.

[@FrankTitzeArt]

Again a great video from somebody with experiences. I did a first step in medium format on cheap Rollei clone Seagull A4 and 9x12cm (German 4x5'' alike) on Linhof Technika end of 90s... but wasn't able to afford a lot in theses days (also time wise) and continued 35mm as done since mid 80s. But after doing only digital since 2012 -- and I will continue with it -- I (re)started medium format in '22 on Bronica GS-1 and 9x12cm on Toyo 45g in '23. In '24 I did now two "first" shoots on the Linhof in more "press style" with monopod only. On top I am in preparation to go beyond 4x5 toward 24x30cm and 30x40cm on a partly self build camera ("half" done) for 2024 or 25 with a Toyo 45g front and already hunted lenses to cover image circle. Yes, 5x7 would be ideal in terms of size, weight and image quality... and I have also an enlarger for it. But 5x7 lacks the available (and not expensive) cameras, holders and film material. Despite the fact that I started to use x-ray material anyhow already on 9x12. What let me choose 9x12cm (4x5) in addition to medium format are the options with camera movement and lenses above all what is offered in medium format despite the shift/tilt options via several available options incl. the native features of the Fuji GX680.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yeah, those are good points as well. I don't mention costs too much since it's not an issue for some people. I'm not one of those people, but they're out there.

[@basspig]

Back in 1992 when I was setting up a digital remote photo sharing system for a high-end photo studio I got to get my hands on a 8x10 print of a real estate shoot that the photographer had done. It was a shoot of the entire side of a building and with the loop I could look at very very intricate details in the photo and one of those details I focused on was the lens of a fluorescent light fixture visible through one of the windows in the building and I was shocked that I could see the individual jeweling or Jewel work of the lens in the light fixture. The amount of detail in that photograph was just staggering!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

The first time I pulled an 8x10 transparency out of the developing tube and looked at it, I fell in love.

[@higherres1]

You didn’t mention ULF (Ultra Large Format), which I shoot. My camera is a 16x20” camera which I built out of Ebony wood. It’s too large for portability so it’s a studio camera. My Toyo 8x10” is my favorite camera for landscape work. Crushes digital!!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Nice to hear that you're shooting ULF. Where is your studio. I love those big negatives.

[@michaelpetersenfilm]

ULF is mentioned several times, even cameras shown.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Hat's off to anyone still shooting larger than 8x10!!!

[@higherres1]

@@michaelpetersenfilm I clearly didn’t read all of the thread-my apologies.

[@higherres1]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite Sorry for such a late reply. My studio is is my home in Sandy, UT

[@kenh.5903]

as I've gotten older I've gone from 4x5 and 8x10 down to 6x7. main reason was that if I carry a smaller load I can stay out longer and create more images and with todays technology I can easily up the resolution if needed. I do have to disagree with you about the quality of the 8x10 contact print. Printing paper can't hold up to the resolution of film that is the same size so you are going to miss out on so much information that isn't visible unless you enlarge. I shoot film, scan and print digitally.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

It's great that you're out there shooting film. I hope you enjoy the videos.

[@MrMestrebimba]

Great video and advice!!! Thank you, but I still want to try 4x5 😃

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

As we all should!! lol

[@peterhostettler-vf5qg]

P.S. I kept the twin Rolleiflex of my father .mainly for street photography...also the Götschmann slide projector - wonderful!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Now you can use it when you like and use the Fuji the rest of the time.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Now you can use it when you like and use the Fuji the rest of the time.

[@raywilson9450]

I stopped at medium format. Well, I did find a 4x5 Calumet at a charity shop. Never used it, though. You could also do a video on slide film versus negative. My 6x7 slides from the Grand Canyon in Velvia are stunning.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, shooting slides were great. I rented a 6x17 once for a weekend and used it with slide film. It was amazing to see thoughs big images.

[@carbonjimfitzgerald]

Nice video Rob. I've been at it for 50+ years as well and now just shoot 8x10, 8x20 and 14x17. All cameras that I have built. I stocked up on film years ago and only print carbon transfer contact prints. Made my life simple. I even taught our dear departed friend Per Volquartz carbon printing. Start at 8x10 and go up from there. X-ray film is available in 8x10, 11x14 and 14x17 and yes there is a learning curve but it is cheap. Just get to it! Thanks Rob.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Hey Jim, good to hear from you. I often think about those gatherings out west. I would do it again.

[@ruedigermerz9525]

Love your videos. And I 100% agree. I have a Sinar F2 4x5 and stopped there. I was considering an 8x10. But everything is 4 times more expensive. I did not take the Sinar out of its bag for the last 6 month and I am considering selling it. Its just too much hassle. I rather take my Mamiya C220. Keep up the great work.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I'm glad you're enjoying them.

[@Keith80027]

I almost went down the rabbit hole but stopped at 2.25x2.25 shooting both B&W and Color. I shot 35mm film for the reception and 2.25 for the actual wedding. Loved doing wedding with film and wedding albums. I did a lot of landscapes with my 2.25 too. There is nothing better than large film for quality and details.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

If you want great quality from film, the larger the negative is better for sure. Of course you give up things like portability and speed. Sometimes they're important, sometimes not.

[@stevewilliamson7264]

OK, I'm a labor union guy, who 's a Kraken hockey fan who also just bought an 8x10 rear standard for my Sinar Norma. You checked a lot of boxes for me with this one. First, thanks for distinguishing between a workers' strike and they're being locked out by their employer. Few in the public understand the difference. It's big. A slippery slope i encountered was already having a 4x5 monorail and facing the fact that 5x7 and 8x10 format changes were available. Too easy to slide down that slope...and here i am at the bottom (i hope!) at 8x10. For all the reasons you cited: contact printing, image quality, etc. It's irresistible! But, to add to the chorus, I always dig your videos because you combine knowing your stuff with real practicality, and calling it as you see it. All the while your continuing wonder for this world comes through. You target newbies, and have a knowing sense of humor about how we approach film photography. I'm as old or older, yet find you to be photography elder whose unusually generous with all you've learned.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Thanks, glad you're enjoying things.

[@Larpy1933]

Your presentation in this video is amazing. I love the incredibly unusual balance of nerdy techno-details and the (oh so rare) warm humanity that comes through here. I take your advice as if you are Moses coming down from the mountain top - carrying you-know-what in your hands. I’ve studied under guys who use 8x10, 7x17, 12x20. And I’ve attended a Pt-Pd workshop. You could call your channel “No B.S. Inc.”. I get the sense that you know EXACTLY what you’re talking about. Thanks, Rob. (From Victoria, BC). Aha! “Big Camera Workshop” - thanks for the reminder. I bought a ZM Sonnar 50/1.5 from you.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Hey, glad you enjoy it. I hope that ZM lens is still working wonders for you.

[@randywaldron2715]

I make my own traditional black and white prints in a wet darkroom. I shoot 6 x 4.5 medium format. I could go bigger, but since I only enlarge to 12 x 16 there wouldn't be any point. In 6 x 4.5 I have a Mamiya slot system and a compact folder that fits in a pocket. Full disclosure, I am also restoring a 121 year old 8x10 camera, but that is only for the experience, not the bigger negatives.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

As long as you're out there and having fun. Enjoy it.

[@CalumetVideo]

I can agree! Unless one prints very large, large format can be an overkill! I really only use my Toyo 45A 4x5 to shoot still life or landscapes where I want perspective control. My Hasselblad 500 CM can print nicely even at 13x19 even cropped to 6x4.5. People are always talking about larger negatives on you tube, but it all comes down to how large is one going to print. I would love to print 4x5 in the darkroom, but I would need a suitable enlarger and trays etc, my 4x5 gets scanned and then printed from there.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I'm sure that works out great. Lot's of great options for each of us, and no truly right and only way.

[@MagnarNordal]

In the 1980s, I worked in a professional photo laboratory in Oslo, Norway. Our customers were happy to share their techniques and stories with enthusiasts like me. It was a great time, but the introduction of the digital camera and personal printers stole many customers.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Sad but true.

[@Kitsaplorax]

I worked in downtown Seattle. I visited the Curtis Gallery on my lunch hour. I saw platinum prints. Great photographer, terrible documentary photographer. Learned b&w out of books, learned alt process by myself. Dumbest thing I did was to buy a full plate camera and lens, then sell the camera when I was called an idiot by people doing digital negatives from 35mm or camera phone images, since digital negatives were just as good. Looking for another plate wood camera now.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

If we had only known at the time.... not to listen to the crowd.

[@shortsonfire79]

This was an interesting and insightful watch/listen. I've been into photography for 8 years, film for 6, and enlarging 4x5 for 3. Earlier this year I had the bright idea of "saving money" by not buying a backpacking Chamonix 8x10 field and instead making my own with the intention of contact printing. When you started talking about 8x10 enlarging, I started getting cold feet; very good points about cropping, etc. With a kid on the way, I might need to reassess my desire to build and shoot 810 at all; I certainly can't fit an 8x10 enlarger in my house!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Don't want to scare you off but if you could try/borrow one for a weekend you might find a few answers. Everyone has to draw a line in the sand where they want the quality increase to end. Things get much more difficult the larger you go. And this is without considering the costs, which are issues to some people but not everyone, so I don't usually mention them.

[@LyndonPatrickSmith]

Hmm maybe I shouldn’t have watched this video! I have a Fuji 6x9 GW690iii and was thinking that someday I’d jump to large format. The Linhof Technical 4x5 cameras appeal to me both from a film standpoint but also for the potential of using it with a digital Hasselblad back (the 50 MP CFV II 50C). So from your point of view it’s best to jump to 5x7, but I think for me owning the digital Hasselblad the 4x5 Linhof might be enough. I am not in a rush to do this - it’s more of a long-term plan. If I was just shooting film on it and not digital the bigger the better makes sense. Whatever large format system I eventually get will ultimately be used with both film and the digital back. Rabbit hole indeed…

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

The Linhof system is wonderful, and folds up nice and compact, which is great for hiking.

[@j_g123]

Started my career on the tail-end of film photography era. Had to shoot the "big" product shoots on a Sinar technical. No love for that process,especially if your living depended on it. Welcomed digital with open arms. Now we just use canon tse lenses for product and architecture.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes digital has sure changed the world of photography. The great thing is there's room for everyone and every genre of photography... digital, film, even glass plate if that's what you want.

[@brycepinson8641]

I am afraid your warning has come about 4 years too late for me... started with 35mm as a kit. Went to digital in college. Then thought I'd shoot some more 35mm... soon realized I wanted more for a project. Jumped to 4x5. Fell in love with the process.... Finances and film options have kept me from going larger.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Sounds like you're having fun, which is what counts.

[@alanhuntley55]

The points made in this video concerning the benefits and pitfalls of moving up in format are well said! And, I agree. However, I started with 4x5, then fairly quickly moved to 8x10 (Deardorff) in the early 80's and, to this day, it remains my favorite format. I have other format cameras to choose from (including digital), but I'll more than likely choose the 8x10. Being a senior who likes to hike out into the wilds and who also loves 8x10, in recent years I added an Intrepid 8x10. This camera is significantly lighter than the Deardorff and with Fuji C lenses it enables me to continue hiking with this format. I still use the Deardorff, but closer to the car! 😉

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

“Anything more than 500 yards from the car just isn’t photogenic.” - Edward Weston Those Fuji C lenses are great. I owned both the 300mm and the 450mm and toyed with the idea of the 600mm before I sold off the 810.

[@tomaswmitchellphotography]

I’ve been working as a professional photographer and photo finisher since 1987. I’ve been through the full range of cameras and now I shoot full frame digital exclusively. I sell my work as large prints and ship prints all over the USA, Canada and Europe. I have often said if I was going to go back to film I would have an 8x10 camera, an enlarger and I would develop and print my own work. Your video is dead on. It would be a rabbit hole I really don’t want to go down when I can shoot digital and sell my work as large as 60 inches wide and it looks good not as good as a large format image but good.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

In a lot of cases digital looks better. It doesn't look the same but that's okay too.

[@tomaswmitchellphotography]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite I agree film really has its own look.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

It's great that we have the options. lol.

[@JeffreyHauser]

I shot 4X5 many years ago, when taking a college photography course. I can still remember the quality of these images to this day. 😊

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, it's hard to beat that quality. Fun to shoot with as well.

[@philipcaldwell3187]

I leaned back in the 60’s that if you were going down the large format rabbit hole it helps to be a chemistry major.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

You're likely right. It sure would help.

[@waynesimon7096]

Great talk. I became obsessed with the actual cameras and repairing damaged ones, an obsession onto itself. I think I just love the physical item. It's like collecting antiques I suppose. I currently have around fifteen large format cameras and I just love the things and the history they represent. To me they are all little mechanical time machines. Maybe I should be seeing a physiologist and take addiction shots LOL. We all have our own peculiarities I suppose, and why not, life is too short to be normal. There is no normal.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

There is no normal, and if there is, then it's likely boring.

[@nedkelly2035]

I shot in formats up to 8x10, never larger, and not that much 8x10. What I did was to get better and better with 4x5. I found that Tech Pan processed in HC-110 would enlarge to about the size of a small wall without grain. But I very rarely printed larger than 16x20 anyway. I used to get about stupid on lens testing, and tried Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon, Fuji, and Zeiss lenses at one time or another on my Linhof Super Technika (never had a Master Technika, had a Tachihara for a while, but preferred the Linhof). I also did something that doubled film cost, but nearly guaranteed best image quality. I would expose for whatever value I thought was best, which was sometimes Zone VIII on Zone VIII, but not always, would filter if I thought appropriate, etc. THEN I would shoot both sides of a film holder at the SAME exposure. The final step, and this is what I don't know of many guys doing, was that I would develop only one sheet of the film, check the results, then adjust the other sheet to fine tune things. Of course I monkeyed around with Farmer's Reducer and Chromium Intensifier at times, but always considered them to be an inferior approach. Used to do a lot of stuff that has fallen by the wayside- gold toner on prints which I don't think you can get now. Did some business with Photographer's Formulary in Missoula, Montana I guess it was. Used Amidol way back, Edwal FG7, etc.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I shot tech pan for a while also. No grain but in the end I went back to Delta films. Keep it fun and keep shooting.

[@tomniblick7365]

Thanks for the trip down memory lane. I just sent my last studio camera-a 4x5 Toyo - to Camera West to sell. I used that camera with PhaseOne and Better Light scan backs to reproduce art for 25 years. Before that it was a Linhof that served dual purpose field and studio. And before that both 4x5 and 8x10 Arca and Kodak cameras to shoot chromes for contact separations for ads and catalog work. I still have mixed feelings but walking around with a Leica M10 or SL2 sure is easier on my knees and back. BTW: my Berkey Direct Screen (color sep) enlarger got a cold light and became a gift to a college student.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Hey thanks for contributing. I'm sure that student will put the enlarger to good use.

[@itstimetogo49]

Fascinating discussion Rob. I've been down the rabbit hole several times and survived. BTW...I have the exact photo of the old hotel in Bodie hanging in my office. Fascinating place! Cheers!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Bodie is a great place to go. I was there twice over the years.

[@wcrofford]

I guess if a person had almost unlimited finance, a person could purchase your choices. I'm retired with very limited finances so, I have a Konica Autoflex T3 (slr), Konica Auto A2 (rangefinder) and an old Olympic TLR. How bad is my photos?

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

The great thing about photography is there's a spot for everyone to enjoy the hobby.

[@Jerry10939]

The quality is worth it. I started with 35 mm and was an Army photographer back in the late eighties, early nineties. But I decided to get a Mamiya 645. Now I have been thinking about large format. I was going towards 4x5 but you don’t think it’s a good idea. I would love to do 8x10 but want to get used to the cameras and sheet film and its development before moving up to 8x10 or larger.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Most people start with 4x5 but if cost isn't an issue, then 8x10 is easier to learn on because everything is bigger.

[@DavidSmith-tl1qh]

I no longer shoot large format ...4x5 & 8x10, but one very important thing you failed to talk about was scanning large format and good large format inkjet prints...THEY"RE FANTASTIC! and my Epson scanner I used to use, was bought nearly 18 years ago and it STILL did a fantastic job. Towards the end I would shoot 4x5 B&W and have it developed as a ...POSTIVE as well. I don't know if the gentleman who owned... DR5 is still in business. The main reason for abandoning large format was it became FAR TOO EXPENSIVE! But I have a friend who still has not only 8x10 but 8x20 as well, and has two sets of cameras... one for here and one he keeps in Scotland where he's originally from.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's interesting. Great that you've found a solution that works for you.

[@pietjekarbonkel2710]

I like 6x7 and 6x8 format . I can use Mamiya RB67 filmholders also on my Horseman fieldcamera with Fujinon lenses . I love the RB back on the Mamiya and Horseman . I have my own darkroom and do the filmdevelopment and printing myself . If you use a good fine grain film on 6x7 and 6x8 you can have very good results . Sometime I think about a Horseman 45 FA to do 4x5 inch . But it is a lot more expensive . And it is useless to shoot on cheap 4x5 inch film because a professional fine grain 6x7 or 6x8 film give better results than a cheap 4x5 inch film ..... So it is for me 6x7 medium format .

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, 67 is great. To shoot 4x5, even with a nice camera like the FA , is so much more work for a small increase in size.

[@nanoulandia]

I can relate to this. Used to shoot film in the 90s, then switched to digital in the mid-2000s. Then got more seriously involved with photography again in 2021 and have slowly been going down the rabbit hole.... first APS-C, then digital medium format, now got the film bug again and just bought a 645 (and took my old Nikon 35mm out of storage and it still works!). Thought about 67, but figured 645 is an easier entry point. I would love to be able to do large format but have back issues so don't think that will ever be doable. Large format images are amazing but I think medium format is good enough for me.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Each format change has it's own rewards and also challenges!!!

[@Bob-g1i]

Just ordered a 4x5 and that is about the limit of cost I am willing to endure. But, not just for quality... It is 3x the size neg of my RB67 and my printer is 24" so 4x5 will produce wonderful prints in that size. But for me, it is a return to a camera I had but with a 25 cent allowance in 1959, couldn't afford to print my 4x5 negs past 8x10. Also, when I am out photoing, my RB gets tons of questions and I pick up clients. I expect the 4x5 will be even better and is something I can market that sets me apart from most other portrait guys. Tilt and swing seems to open some wonderful creative possibilities for portraits. But most important... for me it is fun. Hey, I suffered through the RB learning curve and only yesterday it tried to bite me in the butt but made that same mistake 8 years ago and remembered. Seemed like the slides on the graflex back weren't going all the way so with the back off moved them both to lock... and they wouldn't release. Remembered the tiny levers that released them. I expect with LF, it isn't so much camera malfunction issues and operator error. So bottom line for me, it isn't just image quality, although it does give me all I need, And it sets me apart from the pack... like my hot lights. That was my dad's setup in the 30's that I inherited because when he got back from ww2, he reasoned that photography could be a discretionary item, meat , was not. You have taught large format for years. Is there a book you can recommend on LF photography, and particularly one about LF portraiture?

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Since you've already been shooting portraits with the RB, I would run a couple tests on the new camera, then book a model to try on a real person. You're going to learn more from that than any book could teach you. You don't have to shoot real tight right away, not head and shoulders, but more the person and their space. Process the shoot, make a final print, then book a second one. Think of it this way, if you did one every week, that's 50 after one year. You're learning curve will skyrocket. Also remember there's no depth of field with the larger negatives, so you might shoot a faster film like HP5 over something that you usually shoot like FP4. At least to start. It's going to be fun, so get started.

[@like2view]

I also wanted to up my game. I had a 4x5 Speed Graphic, and although I'd shot a few frames when I first bought it, for various reasons, it gathered dust or the occasional roll film back. For the reasons you've stated so eloquently ... I was sliding down the rabbit hole.... 4x5 scanner, Taco method in Patterson Tank, Stearman Press 45. .. At this point I am not happy, and rather than go further down the hole, I've stopped chasing it soo hard. Film is damn expensive and my developing tank is intermittent ... so ..as they say, if you see your escape ...take it! Like you, I am concentrating on MF.. I might find that hole again.. .. (obsession sickness) but I am on the wagon.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Same wagon as me. It's a comfortable wagon to be on!!

[@juliettehotel]

I had a different experience. Despite having constant and free access to an 8x10 enlarger, I never availed myself of it, preferring to contact print both 8x10 and 4x5, but always enlarged 6xX. Also, there is a big difference between and sheet film vs. roll film, such as picking an emulsion for each exposure as well as each exposure’s development. As for ULF, I have no experience, but I noticed at 8x10, there were amazing optics and varieties, but beyond that people seem to adapt a single lens made for another purpose. Nowadays, a GFX is pretty nice.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Yes, all true. The detail on a contact print can be amazing but as we all know, it's the content that matters most, and sometimes those big cameras are too heavy to haul around.

[@LargeFormatLeo]

Great video and personal anecdotes! I personally find 4x5 to be the right format for me and my needs, but definitely understand your points on why one would jump to 8x10 over 4x5 especially after seeing those slides and prints! I think for me its mostly preference of 4x5 being comfortable for me to work with all around. I'll be lucky enough this year to pick up an ebony sv45u2, it's great hearing a testament to their quality and performance from an official retailer from when they were in production.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's for watching the video, of all the gear that I regret selling off, the Ebony SV810 is by far my biggest regret.

[@LargeFormatLeo]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite Damn, well I hope it can eventually find its way back to you!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

lol

[@richardstollar4291]

Totally agree, don't buy a 4x5 - I started on 4x5 about 4 years ago and now shoot almost exclusively 8x10.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's nice to hear!!

[@charlesmoeller-vu9nq]

I started photography in high school, 1961, as the school photog using their 3x5 and their photo lab. University of Washington I got to use their 5x7 and their lab. Black White is stilL KING but now I use 120 in a role. 2 years ago my kitchen fire destroyed everything except for my collection of Pentax bodies, lenses, and bellows, etc. My beatutiful enlarger melted. But I still have the burning desire, bad.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

There's always time to fire it back up, so to speak.

[@johnkasianowicz6536]

I’ve always thought contact prints of large format B&W negatives looked like jewels too. I recently picked up an Arca-Swiss 4x5 Field Camera with a Horseman 6x9 roll film back. Acquiring images with it is a lot slower than with my Leica M6-TTL and Leica full-frame digital cameras, but it’s fun.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

that's the key.... have fun.

[@mvd944l]

I really enjoyed this video, not inclined to get into it really but I love looking at these 100 year old photographs and marvelling at the quality, thanks for your time.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@gavinjenkins899]

You can buy a 14x36 inch sheet of fuji medical chest xray film for less than $3 each (box of 25 for $70).

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Interesting, does it work well?

[@gavinjenkins899]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite Yeah it's just film. It's orthochromatic, double sided emulsion, and has no halation layer.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

That's good to know, thanks.

[@gavinjenkins899]

@@stillshootinginblackandwhite You can get it in other more useful sizes including 8x10 too (about 100 sheets for $40 for that). Since it's ortho, it's very easy to cut down into anything you want with a paper cutter in safelight. Takes barely more time than just loading film from a box. I've even experimented with the gigantic size cutting it into long strips and rolling my own 120 and 35mm out of it (The Canon 10QD can use 35mm film with no perforations), but that's a lot more work than using it as sheet film.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Very interesting, I didn't know that.

[@RichardPerez-mm2ow]

This is the most sincere and wise advise I have ever heard. Thank you.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Glad you're enjoying the videos.

[@buyaport]

Thanks for sharing your story.

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

Thanks for watching my youtube videos.

[@JesseShotland]

very happy to have found this channel!

[@stillshootinginblackandwhite]

I'm glad that you're enjoying it!!!