3 ms·

I used to travel with a crown graphic - pretty much the same camera as in the video, shooting colour positive. You can do some great stuff with them, and tilt-s

I used to travel with a crown graphic - pretty much the same camera as in the video, shooting colour positive. You can do some great stuff with them, and tilt-shift is trivial, if that’s your thing. Quality on slow film is just crazy - I’ve a shot of an ex, she’s half-frame, and you can see the second hand on her watch - you can get very fine focus with a loupe, and having a Polaroid back to do some instant tests was a godsend - but you can’t get the film for it any more. I have no idea where he’s finding film so cheap - I stopped when it was costing me £5 per exposure. It also folded up into a very neat little box, which is irresistible to children - sadly one was handed it by a friend, who promptly destroyed it.

Palomides 7y ago
I literally just bought a box of the film he's using here, it's a high contrast red-insensitive film, $15 for 50 sheets, https://www.freestylephoto.biz/531345-Arista-Ortho-Litho-Film-3.0-3.9x4.9-50-Sheets-For-4x5-Film-Holders https://www.freestylephoto.biz/531345-Arista-Ortho-Litho-Fil... developing it for normal contrast images is more difficult but not impossible
- staticautomatic 7y ago
  I've shot a ton of Kodak Ortho film in 4x5 at EI 3, 6, and 12. It's actually super easy to develop. I recommend stand development in 1:100 HC-110 with occasional agitation. The developer basically exhausts after 10 or 12 minutes depending on the temperature, which happens to be pretty much exactly the right development time, so it's pretty much impossible to over-develop.
- tecleandor 7y ago
  Seems similar to xray ortho film, green or blue sensitive, and is pretty cheap.
- mmcwilliams 7y ago
  Greatly reduced Rodinal, on the order of 1:100, will bring some "normal" tones out of hi-con film. At $0.30 a sheet it's not a bad experiment. I was gifted a roll of expired Kodak Imagelink microfilm stock and once it's cut down to sheets that's my development plan for it. Similar tonal range and ISO.
staticautomatic 7y ago
For color, I think it really depends on your willingness to use expired film. I've shot mostly expired film for about 15 years, and once you've tried a range of emulsions of various ages and provenance, it's not hard to figure out how what's going to perform well under what conditions. Even 20 year old color neg performs pretty well with only modest overexposure. B&W you can still get down to about $1/sheet if you're willing to shoot Arista.
lokl 7y ago
If you want cheap film for large format, shoot x-ray film.
paulmd 7y ago
Impossible Project has brought back peel-apart 8x10 polaroid film. Currently $18 a shot, so not for the faint of wallet, but perhaps they will bring back 4x5 someday as well.
- ngcc_hk 7y ago
  Expensive roller to “develop” it though.
poooogles 7y ago
>I have no idea where he’s finding film so cheap - I stopped when it was costing me £5 per exposure. Ilford is £1.50 a shot + chemicals. Rodinal is pretty cheap and if you're printing then the fixer cost is negligible.
- foldr 7y ago
  OP mentioned color positive film, which can go for around £5 a sheet.
piffey 7y ago
There are still photographers shooting 4x5 in DC professionally with the press core. One is David Burnett and the other I can't remember off hand, but he's been shooting 4x5 of the congressional hearings. You just can't beat the quality of large format. With Kodak releasing Ektachrome in 4x5 this last January I've been shooting more and more of it. It's expensive for chromes, but shooting HP5 sheets is pretty cheap for the quality of the output in the end.
foldr 7y ago
Are you sure you mean a Crown Graphic? A Crown Graphic is about as different as it's possible to be from the camera in the video while still being a 4x5 camera (https://vintagecameralab.com/wp-content/uploads/graflex-crown-graphic_011.jpg https://vintagecameralab.com/wp-content/uploads/graflex-crow...). It also doesn't make tilt-shift movements as easy as you're suggesting.
- Finnucane 7y ago
  The camera in the video is a Graflex Graphic View, so made by the same manufacturer, but yeah, totally different in use. A Crown does not have the same level of movements. But they [Graphic Views] are relative bargains for view cameras if you can find one in decent shape.
klodolph 7y ago
Going to admit that I only scanned through the video. More so than in smaller formats, B&W is cheaper. Older style emulsions (cubic grain) are also cheaper than newer style (tabular / shell / whatever). Litho film is cheaper still. B&W is USD$1-$3 per shot in 4x5, and if you process yourself you’re only paying for your own time and consumables. Newer styles like Delta, T-Max go for $2-$3. Older styles like HP5, FP4, Tri-X go for $1.50-$2.50. Budget lines like Arista can be found around $1/sheet. Ortho litho (what is being used in the video) has always been dirt cheap by comparison. It’s like $0.30 per sheet. Basically, all of the technical innovation that has gone into modern film is simply not used in ortho litho. You just need high contrast and resolution, that’s it. So you don’t need complicated sensitizing dyes or anything of that sort.

Palomides 7y ago

I literally just bought a box of the film he's using here, it's a high contrast red-insensitive film, $15 for 50 sheets, https://www.freestylephoto.biz/531345-Arista-Ortho-Litho-Film-3.0-3.9x4.9-50-Sheets-For-4x5-Film-Holders https://www.freestylephoto.biz/531345-Arista-Ortho-Litho-Fil... developing it for normal contrast images is more difficult but not impossible

staticautomatic 7y ago
I've shot a ton of Kodak Ortho film in 4x5 at EI 3, 6, and 12. It's actually super easy to develop. I recommend stand development in 1:100 HC-110 with occasional agitation. The developer basically exhausts after 10 or 12 minutes depending on the temperature, which happens to be pretty much exactly the right development time, so it's pretty much impossible to over-develop.
tecleandor 7y ago
Seems similar to xray ortho film, green or blue sensitive, and is pretty cheap.
mmcwilliams 7y ago
Greatly reduced Rodinal, on the order of 1:100, will bring some "normal" tones out of hi-con film. At $0.30 a sheet it's not a bad experiment. I was gifted a roll of expired Kodak Imagelink microfilm stock and once it's cut down to sheets that's my development plan for it. Similar tonal range and ISO.

staticautomatic 7y ago

For color, I think it really depends on your willingness to use expired film. I've shot mostly expired film for about 15 years, and once you've tried a range of emulsions of various ages and provenance, it's not hard to figure out how what's going to perform well under what conditions. Even 20 year old color neg performs pretty well with only modest overexposure. B&W you can still get down to about $1/sheet if you're willing to shoot Arista.

lokl 7y ago

If you want cheap film for large format, shoot x-ray film.

paulmd 7y ago

Impossible Project has brought back peel-apart 8x10 polaroid film. Currently $18 a shot, so not for the faint of wallet, but perhaps they will bring back 4x5 someday as well.

ngcc_hk 7y ago
Expensive roller to “develop” it though.

poooogles 7y ago

>I have no idea where he’s finding film so cheap - I stopped when it was costing me £5 per exposure. Ilford is £1.50 a shot + chemicals. Rodinal is pretty cheap and if you're printing then the fixer cost is negligible.

foldr 7y ago
OP mentioned color positive film, which can go for around £5 a sheet.

piffey 7y ago

There are still photographers shooting 4x5 in DC professionally with the press core. One is David Burnett and the other I can't remember off hand, but he's been shooting 4x5 of the congressional hearings. You just can't beat the quality of large format. With Kodak releasing Ektachrome in 4x5 this last January I've been shooting more and more of it. It's expensive for chromes, but shooting HP5 sheets is pretty cheap for the quality of the output in the end.

foldr 7y ago

Are you sure you mean a Crown Graphic? A Crown Graphic is about as different as it's possible to be from the camera in the video while still being a 4x5 camera (https://vintagecameralab.com/wp-content/uploads/graflex-crown-graphic_011.jpg https://vintagecameralab.com/wp-content/uploads/graflex-crow...). It also doesn't make tilt-shift movements as easy as you're suggesting.

Finnucane 7y ago
The camera in the video is a Graflex Graphic View, so made by the same manufacturer, but yeah, totally different in use. A Crown does not have the same level of movements. But they [Graphic Views] are relative bargains for view cameras if you can find one in decent shape.

klodolph 7y ago

Going to admit that I only scanned through the video. More so than in smaller formats, B&W is cheaper. Older style emulsions (cubic grain) are also cheaper than newer style (tabular / shell / whatever). Litho film is cheaper still. B&W is USD$1-$3 per shot in 4x5, and if you process yourself you’re only paying for your own time and consumables. Newer styles like Delta, T-Max go for $2-$3. Older styles like HP5, FP4, Tri-X go for $1.50-$2.50. Budget lines like Arista can be found around $1/sheet. Ortho litho (what is being used in the video) has always been dirt cheap by comparison. It’s like $0.30 per sheet. Basically, all of the technical innovation that has gone into modern film is simply not used in ortho litho. You just need high contrast and resolution, that’s it. So you don’t need complicated sensitizing dyes or anything of that sort.