Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 4x5" film, using labs or develop yourself?  (Read 7547 times)
darr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123



WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2012, 03:04:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I develop my film with an ATL 1000. Check the auction site for used ones.
Logged

darlene almeda
what am i up too?
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2509


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2012, 03:35:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm shooting film currently with a Mamiya 7 ii, but I definitely want to go for a view cameras - but with a 120 film back.
When I scan my 6x7 negatives at 4000 DPI (Nikon LS 9000) I get about 500+ megabyte files with nominal 100 Megapixels.
Effectively maybe something around 50 MP (wild guess).
4x5 inch sheet film will not give you that incredibly much more but a lot more hassle:
Development, scanning, storage.

So - you have to decide whats important for you:

If you want ultimate image quality with film - maybe 8x10 inch is the way to go.
If you want camera movements but would be happy with the quality a good MF scan can give you, then a view camera with a roll film back could be the solution and with 2 or 3 backs you have all options to use what film you ever need - C41, E6 or b/w.

Cheers
~Chris
Logged

RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 597


« Reply #22 on: February 26, 2012, 08:27:59 PM »
ReplyReply

That's certainly not true.  4x5 clearly has an advantage over 6x7.

Read Tim Parkin's Big Camera Comparison. http://onlandscape.timparkin.co.uk/2011/12/22/big-camera-comparison/

Logged
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2509


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #23 on: February 27, 2012, 12:55:23 AM »
ReplyReply

That's certainly not true.  4x5 clearly has an advantage over 6x7.

Read Tim Parkin's Big Camera Comparison. http://onlandscape.timparkin.co.uk/2011/12/22/big-camera-comparison/

I didn't want to imply it has no advantage.
I just wanted to relate the advantage to the significant amount of additional hassle you'll get.
And when wanting to stand this additional hassle for better IQ, 8x10 might be an option.
Logged

John Rodriguez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 91


« Reply #24 on: February 29, 2012, 10:04:19 AM »
ReplyReply

I didn't want to imply it has no advantage.
I just wanted to relate the advantage to the significant amount of additional hassle you'll get.
And when wanting to stand this additional hassle for better IQ, 8x10 might be an option.


I don't see much additional hassle with sheet film versus roll film with a view camera, especially considering you get 95x120mm versus 60x70mm of film real estate (significant to me). 

Development - Better with sheets, you can vary development to suit the intended photography.  You'd have to carry a LOT of roll backs to accomplish that.

Scanning - Yes, it's cheaper to drum scan 6x7, but that's a cost of resolution.  If you're flatbed scanning at home the only difference is the number of images you scan at a time.

Storage - ?  It's pretty easy to store 4x5, I use index card boxes.

The only extra hassle I see is loading and carrying film holders, but it's worth it for me.  Now, a long trip in the backcountry traveling light?  A 6x9 back loaded with Portra 400, camera and two lenses becomes attractive.
Logged
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2509


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #25 on: February 29, 2012, 10:35:39 AM »
ReplyReply

[...]  Now, a long trip in the backcountry traveling light?  A 6x9 back loaded with Portra 400, camera and two lenses becomes attractive.

Actually thats one of my future plans.  Grin
Logged

John Rodriguez
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 91


« Reply #26 on: March 01, 2012, 10:44:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I've got a setup just for that purpose  Grin
Logged
mmurph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 507


WWW
« Reply #27 on: March 02, 2012, 12:09:13 PM »
ReplyReply

I used to develop all of my own B&W film. I used to buy bulk chemicals and mix my own developers, etc.

When I switched to shooting all C-41 film in 1998 (and converting to B&W from color - incredible control in LR to do that now)  I started to send all of my film to the lab.  There just is not teh creativity involved with color film developing as there is with B&W.

I also went to all digital output with film capture in 1998.  I chose Portra 160 NC for scanning because of the dynamic range it captured. You can always "throw away" information to get higher saturation/contrast. You can't go in the opposite direction as easily.

When I got my Canon 1DsII in 2004, I stopped using my 645 and 6x7 film cameras. It wasn't exactly planned, it was just what happened.  That was the tipping point for me in terms of quality & work flow & cost.  My 6x7 pro film with lab developing was $1 per frame.

I continued to ship my 4x5 film to E-6 Lab in Atlanta (they also do C-41.)

With the newest generation of 35mm FF cameras coming, I have sold all of my 4x5 film equipment.  Again, it is the tipping point of quality vs. cost vs. what I can get by stitching, etc. 

That is not to say there is equal quality, or no reason to shoot 4x5 or MFDB anymore.  It is just that the marginal value and incremental cost at $5 per sheet tipped the value to the latest generation of cameras for me.

Michael 

Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad