Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 64 of 64

Thread: 8x10 vs IQ180

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    260
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    BTW has anyone actually shot 8 X 10 view camera's. I used to use a Horseman 8x10 but I would have killed for a Sinar.

    I was a commercial photographer from the late '60's to the early "90's, since then I concentrate on fine art exclusively. I had clients that could appreciate and pay for 8x10, both transparancies and color negatives and of course black and white. I photographed much more often on 4x5 or 2 1/4, but it largely depended on the job. I mostly did architectural and product illustrations, but I also did, fashion, portraiture, horses, aerials and public relations, hell I even did some weddings. I still use some of my 8x10 lenses on my 4x5 and strap my d700 onto the back and get amazing images.
    I would say that resolution , magnification and accutance are the basis for what we would call sharpness, and digital has some distinct advantages. If you don't start with noise you can up res for a very long time, and it simply doesn't fall apart. It doesn't get sharper but it doesn't fall apart either. Film cannot do this.
    The upshot is this. If you want to make the case that digital has arrived and is a good working process, not a question in my mind. However if you are trying to make the case that film, in any format is dead, no sale here, at all. Period. They are different things and they work differently and I can get a look on film that you cannot reproduce digitally. You may not want nor need the look but there you are. I just scanned an 8x10 negative and printed it to size digitally, and it has a quality that just would never be the same digitally. BTW like Guy I lusted after a better 8x10 my heart throb was either a Sinar or a Cambo. I shoot and have shot the same Cambo 4x5 for over 40 years, but Sinar's were always the ultimate. I found however that there was very good glass at the 8x10 level, and fantastic glass at the 4x5 level, part of what people overlook is not just the resolution but how big an area it got spread out over. My 8x10 was an Ansco, I bought it well used in 1972 from a commercial photographer who had bought it used in 1927, the holders were converted glass plate holders, they still can be easily stepped backward to glass plate. It was romantic handling big heavy equipment, but oddly unlike Guy I always felt confident when I went home after a shoot, I knew I had nailed it to the best of my ability. This isn't a knock on you Guy, I knew photographers that used a lot of poloroid to make certain of their shot and I rarely did or if I did it was one or two pieces to make certain no hidden glare somewhere. I usually shot in really big rooms and the lighting setup was extensive. I would make my assistants insane since I would require them to tell me the exposure before we ever took out our light meter. Since we sometimes had to triple expose to filter for the various sources, I still would insist on the mental work before the light meter. It goes into that previsualization process. This is the picture it has elements, one of which is light, be conscious of everything that goes into the picture. It is not magic. This is an interesting thread. Joe

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    The best part of shooting film is souping it up yourself and using a clean squeegee to get the water of the hanging strip - so you minimise the freakin dust collecting magic these babies have...

    It is a great way to store the raw files too - as long as you are sure you will have access to scanners or a darkroom 20 years from now- will you though?

    Nothing can replace the magic of the image slowly coming to life in the developing tray - the red light teasing you with promise as your lungs suck in all those lovely chemical fumes...

    Darkrooms and film - were for all those endless days of summer - remember them ?

    Resolution was and is and always will be - irrelevant.

  3. #53
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Medicine Hat
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    I have been coming to this forum for about two years now when I first got my 500 C/M and was pondering on whether or not to get a CFv16 back for it. With what I got from this forum and others plus a look at the bank account I decided it was not needed for me as already had the darkroom and the Nikon CS8000 prior to getting the Hasselblad. But I still come here to find out about equipment I am unlikely to see let alone use. I find the tone of some of these postings in this thread rather hostile and some a bit ironic, in that on some other forums people are posting about how medium format digital is now redundant and going to go the way of the dinosaur with the higher megapixel cameras from Canon and Nikon. In the recent past part of my job was doing high speed video of explosions therefore I do know the value of specialized equipment and doubt very much that a Rebel would replace either MFD or a 400000 frame per second Phantom.

    I have neither shot MFD nor anything larger than 5X7 although this past week I did pick up an older Whole Plate camera. But I did have a 8 track and I never remember during their heyday of them being mainstream audio in replacing records or reel to reel. But driving a car full of other kids on country roads to a rural dance or down two track road allowances avoiding illegal pocession charges I do not think a record player in the car would have been a good idea. Film on the other hand was main stream and profession right from the start. A better analogy for 8 tracks might be cassette type cameras as they were for convience and even Kodak's SLR 126 or Pentax's pretty little A110 were never intended for the pro. And if the reference was to being long dead like a 8 track I checked that I can still buy film from at least 7 manufactures and a brand new LF camera from a minimum of 10 companies at least one of which has started up this century. So in both cases, mainstream and availability I cannot see how the comparison is a good one. Seems more like an attack or an insult than a valid comparison. I hope that was not the case but that is how I read it, actually had to check I was not on photo.net

    Anyway just came downstairs from developing some inexpensive film in old Dektol just to see if it is as grainy as I have read. Peter, I fully agree with you the colour image rolling off the Epson is just not the same as the image coming up in the developer. Magic from the first time but those of you shooting for commercial clients I really do understand where you are coming from and although there are pros still shooting film it is very limited. But then I still drive a car with a standard tranny, we do the dishes by hand and my iPod is at least three years old. And if any of you that no longer have any use for film but have a 190 to 210mm enlarging lens that you wish to donate for my Elwood that would be fine as well.

  4. #54
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Believe me if your referring to me than your reading far too deeply in my comments on 8 track tape . I deal strictly for commerce and films usefulness is simply just not there in the commerce side of the house. Honestly I think your being slightly sensitive about film. No one is insulting it at all and most of us loved it at the time we had to work with it. Key word here is HAD to. for many of us digital is a no choice option but play or go home situation. Film was great but it was also nerve ending when a lot of money was on the line. If anything I believe many are complimenting it on the merit of being a excellent learning tool and glad we lived in that era. Maybe you missed that in your reading.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  5. #55
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Unfortunately I wasn't able to make it to the fall workshop, but I'd love to chat with Rodney Lough who is a master at 8x10 capture and now using a Phase back on some occasions to get his opinion. I know when I visited with him a year ago he didn't think the p65 was there yet, wondering how he feels about the IQ180. Maybe the fact this is a PODAS type of event sort of says what he thinks now.

    Bottom line for me, both offer amazing quality in very large prints, and it's probably more about the craft than it is about the gear. Since you'd probably have to print bigger than 10 feet or more to really see any difference (if there is any) maybe we're there? I do know that the pixel peeping from the article doesn't really tell the story and I still firmly believe there were some focus issues going on, but I'm very happy with very large prints from my IQ180.

    So of course now I have to ask myself ... is Phase working on a 120mp+ back? Or are we at the end and their focus is more about better sensors with maybe a slight mp increase (think awesome LiveView)? (Although a 120mp or larger sensor with sensor+ would be sweet)

    I know Ctein over at TOP would emphatically say yes, there is still room to see improvements ... but I have to ask myself if I would move to a higher resolution back if it offered nothing else ...

    (these are rhetorical questions so no need to go there ... off topic I know) )
    Last edited by Wayne Fox; 26th September 2011 at 09:47.
    wayne
    My gallery

  6. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Medicine Hat
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Believe me if your referring to me than your reading far too deeply in my comments on 8 track tape . I deal strictly for commerce and films usefulness is simply just not there in the commerce side of the house. Honestly I think your being slightly sensitive about film. No one is insulting it at all and most of us loved it at the time we had to work with it. Key word here is HAD to. for many of us digital is a no choice option but play or go home situation. Film was great but it was also nerve ending when a lot of money was on the line. If anything I believe many are complimenting it on the merit of being a excellent learning tool and glad we lived in that era. Maybe you missed that in your reading.
    Guy

    I may have been referring to your comments in regards to 8 tracks which I stand by that I think was maybe not the best analogy but definitely not on the tone of some of the comments as you have been your normal thoughtful self. Perhaps I should have done two postings to make myself clearer. Sorry if I made it sound like I was pointing you out. Also I do think I stated that I understand why in a commercial setting one might or even must choose digital.

    I am glad that when I did high speed photography that it was digital video instead of on film as we were able to test before hand and also know right away if we got the shot and I do shoot digital but do like film and the mechanical cameras better.

  7. #57
    Senior Member Thierry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    +1

    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Believe me if your referring to me than your reading far too deeply in my comments on 8 track tape . I deal strictly for commerce and films usefulness is simply just not there in the commerce side of the house. Honestly I think your being slightly sensitive about film. No one is insulting it at all and most of us loved it at the time we had to work with it. Key word here is HAD to. for many of us digital is a no choice option but play or go home situation. Film was great but it was also nerve ending when a lot of money was on the line. If anything I believe many are complimenting it on the merit of being a excellent learning tool and glad we lived in that era. Maybe you missed that in your reading.
    Thierry Hagenauer
    [email protected]

  8. #58
    Subscriber Member jotloob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    KEMPTEN / GERMANY
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    116

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterA View Post
    The best part of shooting film is souping it up yourself and using a clean squeegee to get the water of the hanging strip - so you minimise the freakin dust collecting magic these babies have...
    It is a great way to store the raw files too - as long as you are sure you will have access to scanners or a darkroom 20 years from now- will you though?
    Nothing can replace the magic of the image slowly coming to life in the developing tray - the red light teasing you with promise as your lungs suck in all those lovely chemical fumes...
    Darkrooms and film - were for all those endless days of summer - remember them ?
    Resolution was and is and always will be - irrelevant.

    Peter

    I fully agree to what you say .
    It was not easy for me to give up my LF darkroom after having developped
    B/W film and images for more than 30 years .
    But serious back problems forced me to do so .
    Now , my todays darkroom is the "lightroom" in front of my MAC and I appreciate the comfort although the "magic" has gone .
    Regards . Jürgen .
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  9. #59
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Isn't using a 8X10 camera more about the pure experience of photography in its most elemental and challenging form? The doing as opposed to the results?

    There was an interesting thread by a wedding photographer on the DWF that usually uses a 35MM DSLR, but did a wedding for dear friends using an 8X10 camera with B&W film while an assistant did the usual stuff. Maybe 8-10 shots for the whole day ... but I have never seen anything like it ever. Not only did the images shimmer with a depth of richness that is rare these days, the whole demeanor and dynamic of the photographer and the subjects changed. Each image took on a heightened preciousness like a rare treasure.

    In a way, digital in any form is promiscuous ... whether a P&S or a theoretical 120 meg MFD, they promote speed and ease, truncating the forced contemplative experience for all but the most disciplined.

    I don't have the personality to shoot something like a 8X10, but I have a great admiration for those who do.

    -Marc

  10. #60
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    "In a way, digital in any form is promiscuous ... whether a P&S or a theoretical 120 meg MFD, they promote speed and ease, truncating the forced contemplative experience for all but the most disciplined."

    agreed; and the trend toward including video makes it more so. all you have to do is hit the start button and start a continuous spray of imagery.

    Maybe what this will do is separate even more those who do apply the discipline. a good thing

  11. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Perhaps a little story can illustrate my own view.

    We had a marketing event going on in which a 1930 Bentley "raced" against a modern Porsche and a Lamborghini. Cameras were incidental but a chopper did follow taking snaps.

    I drove the Bentley. After my defeat, the nice fellow in the Lambo took me around the track at some unholy speed.

    When he asked how I liked it I said "I almost fell asleep in this thing at 150 mph. At 80 mph in the old car I felt like I was going to die". Point is, it's not how fast you go, it is how fast it feels like you are going. Old cars are magic that way, though you wouldn't want to use them in a modern competitive environment.

    As a nonprofessional, it is not the photographs I take. It is how taking them makes me feel. I enjoy both digital and analog, but 8 x 10 has magic.

  12. #62
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    In a way, digital in any form is promiscuous ... whether a P&S or a theoretical 120 meg MFD, they promote speed and ease, truncating the forced contemplative experience for all but the most disciplined.
    That is the history of photography, from Daguerrotype to wet plate, dry plate, roll film to Polaroid--or Brownie, to Instimatic, to Disk, to APS. Digitial is just the next step in that evolution. But nothing has fundamentally changed the process.

    The more things change...

  13. #63
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    For many this issue does get personal when some photographers say my gear is better, or that your medium is no longer considered useful. This is the whole apples to oranges thing. There is no questioning the usefulness of both film and digital, and where to apply there strengths when applicable. The fundamentals may be the same, the process is certainly different, but the result is what matters. I shoot digital for advertising, editorial, travel and destination. I shoot film for galleries, private collections, books, and art. I appreciate both for what they offer.

  14. #64
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: 8x10 vs IQ180

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    That is the history of photography, from Daguerrotype to wet plate, dry plate, roll film to Polaroid--or Brownie, to Instimatic, to Disk, to APS. Digitial is just the next step in that evolution. But nothing has fundamentally changed the process.

    The more things change...
    ... the more they become different

    Anyway, I think the notion of technological advancement as you've listed was driven by practical matters .... a two pronged thrust: one from the commercial end as methods of mass communication went nearly 100% digital for the sake of speed and efficiency. One from the consumer side for instant gratification, ease, and convenience ... finally solidified by the heightened proliferation of the internet.

    While the fundamentals haven't changed in either of those cases, just more and more are involved now, when it comes to this thread's subject, the process of making an 8 X 10 is considerably different from doing it with MFD camera ... not the mechanics of taking a photo like f/stop, shutter speed etc. but instead the form's general effect on the creative process ... unless you are very disciplined and only allow yourself a few shots which grinds against human nature pretty roughly.

    Not that I miss film, and long for the good old days ... I think I shot 8X10 only twice and was too impatient for it to ever be my medium.

    -Marc

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •