This Summer's Project: Learning Film

[kdthomas]

I think I'd like to try 4x5 film this summer. And I want to learn to do it all. Shoot, develop, print, etc. I want to focus mainly on studio and outdoor portraits, but some landscapes as well.

I'm drawn to the old school, and I can't help but imagine I'll grow with this experience. There's something alluring about sweating and concentrating on the details of every single precious shot, rather than hammering away with digital like I have been.

What I figure (naively?) the best thing to put priority on is first the lens, then quality of the ground glass in the camera, and the enlarger. I want to work up a sort of budget ... I don't want to get too crazy (and I'm throwing this number out without knowing if it's realistic) but I'd like not to spend more than about $2K. Entry to mid-level stuff, but I'm fortunate enough that I can go a few nickels more for good quality. As long as I'll know where that money went.

One thing that is a critical deal breaker. I have to be able to fire the flashes/strobes/etc somehow with the shutter. Gotta happen. Otherwise I'm probably not gonna do it. I can (and will!) use natural light, but I really, really want the flash capability.

Can I get an idea of body/lens/enlarger/lab equipment recommendations?

 

[Dave442]

Sounds like an excellent idea. I would buy all used equipment.
I've only had to sit in front of a LF camera and never behind the lens. Find subjects with a lot of patience.

 

[Derrel]

Virtually all modern view camera lenses will be mounted in a leaf shutter that has a flash synch contact, a PC outlet, on the outside of the shutter mount. To that PC port, you can attach a PC synch cord, or a cord to a trigger, which will trip your power pack. Most leaf shutters for view lenses will have a top speed of 1/500 second, and flash can be shot at any speed with a leaf shutter.

There are many,many used 4x5 view cameras available. Calumet monorail and Toyo monorails are probably the most common, affordable 4x5s available in good numbers, but there are many other brands, both new and old. I don't see a lot of need to go "fancy" if all you want is a learner.

But, back to the view camera idea. You actually said just "4x5", and there is another type of camera that shoots 4x5 sheet film, the press camera. A 4x5 Speed Graphic or Crown Graphic would actually be much faster, and easier, for outdoor portraiture, since either can be fitted with a rangefinder, and an eye-level viewfinder, which would allow more or less "instantaneous" portraiture in real-world situations, whereas the view camera has like a 90-second to three minute setup time. You would want to verify that the leaf shutter lens is new enough that is does, actually, have a PC outlet and X-synch.

 

[tirediron]

While I see the attraction of 4x5, have you considered an MF roll-film camera instead? That stuff is so stupidly cheap now it's a crime; there's an RB67 S, w/ 3 lenses, case, multiple backs and a whole bunch of other stuff on my local Craig's List right now for $750, and I would expect that with a little haggling, it could be had for $5-600. 6x7 is a BIG negative (granted, not 4x5 big, but still plenty big) and shooting portraiture with an MF camera is easier and less painfully time consuming that a view camera.

 

[limr]

While I see the attraction of 4x5, have you considered an MF roll-film camera instead? That stuff is so stupidly cheap now it's a crime; there's an RB67 S, w/ 3 lenses, case, multiple backs and a whole bunch of other stuff on my local Craig's List right now for $750, and I would expect that with a little haggling, it could be had for $5-600. 6x7 is a BIG negative (granted, not 4x5 big, but still plenty big) and shooting portraiture with an MF camera is easier and less painfully time consuming that a view camera.

+1.

 

[Gary A.]

While I see the attraction of 4x5, have you considered an MF roll-film camera instead? That stuff is so stupidly cheap now it's a crime; there's an RB67 S, w/ 3 lenses, case, multiple backs and a whole bunch of other stuff on my local Craig's List right now for $750, and I would expect that with a little haggling, it could be had for $5-600. 6x7 is a BIG negative (granted, not 4x5 big, but still plenty big) and shooting portraiture with an MF camera is easier and less painfully time consuming that a view camera.

+1

John beat me to the punch. I just acquired a Fuji GX680III. It's a 6x8 and comes standard with a bellows for shifts and tilts. It is a beast of a camera and not built for handholding.

With very careful shopping, you can probably get camera w/accessories and a couple of lenses and developing equipment under your budget. Unless you're hell-bent on a wet darkroom, I suggest scanning your images. A quality home scanner will kill your budget and the inclusion of a good handheld light meter and a high end tripod will also put you over the top. You can always send the negs out for scanning until you replenish your excess coins. I seriously doubt if you'll see any difference in IQ between a MF and LF until you hit something like a 3'x4' size print.

 

[kdthomas]

While I see the attraction of 4x5, have you considered an MF roll-film camera instead? That stuff is so stupidly cheap now it's a crime; there's an RB67 S, w/ 3 lenses, case, multiple backs and a whole bunch of other stuff on my local Craig's List right now for $750, and I would expect that with a little haggling, it could be had for $5-600. 6x7 is a BIG negative (granted, not 4x5 big, but still plenty big) and shooting portraiture with an MF camera is easier and less painfully time consuming that a view camera.

Doh! (Slapping my head) 6x7 centimeters! I was wondering why you had said that LOL. I was thinking, is that a typo? How is 4x5 larger than 6x7?!!!

I really do want to learn the view camera, though. I want to try and get those incredible kinds of prints my heroes would get, and (this is rare for me) I don't mind the tedium. There's a part of me that actually kind of looks forward to being patient with something. (Is that crazy?) And --please correct me if I'm wrong -- I think there'll be less risk with 4x5 and I can move up to 8x10 if I truly lose my mind over it.

 

[Gary A.]

PS- That is a nonstandard magnifying eyepiece on the 680. It's great for landscapes because you can move the eyepiece around on the ground glass to inspect and adjust the camera for every corner of the film. You can also get a 90 degree eyepiece which makes it much easier for portraits and higher camera levels.

 

[kdthomas]

With very careful shopping, you can probably get camera w/accessories and a couple of lenses and developing equipment under your budget. Unless you're hell-bent on a wet darkroom, I suggest scanning your images. A quality home scanner will kill your budget and the inclusion of a good handheld light meter and a high end tripod will also put you over the top. You can always send the negs out for scanning until you replenish your excess coins.

I think a wet darkroom is going to be the way for me to go, because I feel like I should learn push and pull with developing. Maybe the scanner next year.

I seriously doubt if you'll see any difference in IQ between a MF and LF until you hit something like a 3'x4' size print.

Wow! Forgive the naïveté, but a 4x5 negative will hold up for a print that large?

 

[Gary A.]

Depends on film type and exposure and such ... but yeah, in my opinion, you should be able to comfortably enlarge a 4x5 to 44'x55', before seeing obvious degradation from a normal viewing distant. 16x20 for both MF and LF is pretty much duck soup.

 

[Gary A.]

It reads as if you're sorta blindly jumping into this LF pool. Maybe there is a MF/LF class or photo group you could join to get you feet wet and make wiser choices in equipment. Spending top dollar for top equipment makes it pretty easy not to go wrong ... but often it isn't necessary.

 

[kdthomas]

That was dumb ... Of course it would hold up. With a 35mm sensor we are dealing with pixels. With film, we are talking molecules and with 4x5 that's many more times the surface area.

 

[Gary A.]

With very careful shopping, you can probably get camera w/accessories and a couple of lenses and developing equipment under your budget. Unless you're hell-bent on a wet darkroom, I suggest scanning your images. A quality home scanner will kill your budget and the inclusion of a good handheld light meter and a high end tripod will also put you over the top. You can always send the negs out for scanning until you replenish your excess coins.

I think a wet darkroom is going to be the way for me to go, because I feel like I should learn push and pull with developing. Maybe the scanner next year.

I seriously doubt if you'll see any difference in IQ between a MF and LF until you hit something like a 3'x4' size print.

Wow! Forgive the naïveté, but a 4x5 negative will hold up for a print that large?

A wet darkroom is a long term learning curve. Coming out of the blocks ... all you'll want is a print without dust and some contrast ... over time ... a lot of time ... you get the routine down for controlling dust and adjust your development time/temp/solution/agitation for decent contrast. Then you realize that you can control your exposure to match your development and in return this will give you much more control over contrast and grain. For me it was a long/wasteful/expensive road. I still recommend developing at home, but an enlarger ... nahhh ... better results with a scanner. If you've never experienced wet printing ... then yeah, it will teach you tons in exposing, developing and previsualization. But a classroom environment may be the best methodology to jump into printing and to get you climbing up the film learning curve.

 

[Gary A.]

That was dumb ... Of course it would hold up. With a 35mm sensor we are dealing with pixels. With film, we are talking molecules and with 4x5 that's many more times the surface area.

With B&W film, not molecules, but silver bromide crystals. The larger the crystal the greater the grain. But, up to a point, larger crystals deliver sharper prints.

 

[kdthomas]

A wet darkroom is a long term learning curve. Coming out of the blocks ... all you'll want is a print without dust and some contrast ... over time ... a lot of time ... you get the routine down for controlling dust and adjust your development time/temp/solution/agitation for decent contrast. Then you realize that you can control your exposure to match your development and in return this will give you much more control over contrast and grain. For me it was a long/wasteful/expensive road. I still recommend developing at home, but an enlarger ... nahhh ... better results with a scanner. If you've never experienced wet printing ... then yeah, it will teach you tons in exposing, developing and previsualization. But a classroom environment may be the best methodology to jump into printing and to get you climbing up the film learning curve.

So it sounds like step 1 is camera, lens, and a view camera class, while sending the film out for develop/scan
Step 2 is a wet darkroom, and a scanner, probably another class
Step 3 is an enlarger, and more classes.

That way I can bail if/when I find it ain't for me. If I get everything at once that may be a little overwhelming. Too many variables. And I can invest a little more in quality at each step rather than having to compromise too much up front.

Does that sound like sound reasoning?