Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/01/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Not Leica: Was enlargers, is now BD's favorite photographic subject
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:52:38 -0800

On 1/27/04 11:58 AM, "Jim Hemenway" <Jim@hemenway.com> wrote:

> Feli:
> 
> I tried moving up from medium format a couple of years ago... 6x7cm to
> 4x5" isn't much of a change.
> 
> You might want to try 11x14, or at least 8x10.  You won't need an
> enlarger as you'll be able to make contact prints and an 11x14 or 8x10
> isn't that much more trouble to work with than a 4x5.
> 
> Here's one from last Septemebr which I've only recently got around to
> scanning, it's one of BD's favorite subjects:
> 
> http://www.hemenway.com/NubbleIslandLighthouse.jpg
> 
> If you're on dial-up you may want this one instead:
> http://www.hemenway.com/NubbleIslandLighthouse-small.jpg
> 
> Ekatachrome 100, Schneider Symmar-s 360mm f6.8
> 
> Jim - http://www.hemenway.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feli di Giorgio wrote:
>> Right now I have a Saunder/LPL 6700 with a color head, which i use to
>> print black/white.Very nice unit, but lately I've been having this itch
>> to shoot with my 4x5. Unfortunately my enlarger will only go up to 6x7,
>> so I have been looking at the Saunders 4500 series with a variable
>> contrast head. New they are cheaper than the average Leica lens, but
>> they aren't exactly giving them away either and I figured with many pros
>> going digital there should be some high-end units floating around out
>> there.
>> 
>> feli
>> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

I find no small difference in quality between sheet film (4x5) and brownie
film. And Its my impression this is the consensus. (as in everybody knows
this). An argument being Ansel used Hasselblad in the second half of his
life. An argument against that being he didnšt shoot much in the second half
of his life. An argument against that being half dome and who cares!

When I first got the chance to work in medium format with a Rolleiflex 2.8 F
I found it to be really a real step up from 35.

But The first time I made a print (it was an 11x14) from a 4x5 neg I thought
I was having an out of body experience in the darkroom. Then I thought
someone left the room lights on. Then I though someone put LSD in my Dektol.
It certainly looked 3d in the orange. Better of course when the white lights
came on. I've scanned that shot recently I still show it. I got soaked
thought the skin shooting it and got some interesting vignetteing on the
top. Which was the bottom of my groundglass.
I often wonder what would have happened if Ansel stayed with sheet film.
When asked which cameras he shot he always said the heaviest one he could
carry. But by then other's were carrying his cameras (he had arthritis) and
would have gladly shouldered an 11x14 for him. Not sure if you could walk a
mile with an 11x14 unless you were Rambo or Arnold. I think Ansel was
immersed mainly in printing his negs from his first half of his life in the
second half. This I've gleaned recently from a DVD I rented about him.




Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland, Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/Catagorypages/PersonalWork.html




- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Eric Welch <eric@jphotog.com> (Re: [Leica] Not Leica: Was enlargers, is now BD's favorite photographic subject)