Hehehehe, George, you just *know* folks are gonna bite on this one :)
I will agree with the premise there are two types of photographers. Those
who think and those who don't. Film format is secondary. I realize it is
far easier to take lots of exposures very quickly in 35mm compared to 4x5.
But there are some very serious and interpretive images made in 35mm. I've
also seen my share of 4x5 images that are just 35mm shots on real big pieces
of film.
Yes, 4x5 by virtue of its bulk and cost tends to be more contemplative and
methodical. At a couple bucks a "click" one should be. There are a whole
lot of steps that must be done correctly or the exposure is junk. Ever
forget to first close the lens diaphragm before removing the dark slide? Or
put the dark slide back in the holder white side out, only to later place a
second image firmly on top of the first? Hmmmm. The great advantage of 4x5
is it affords the photographer absolute control over every aspect of the
image. The great drawback of 4x5 is it *requires* the photographer to
absolutely control every aspect of the image.
Our dear Olys, on the other hand, are light, nimble and much easier to use.
It's pretty hard to lose your dark slide with one <g>. I've yet to see a
motor drive for 4x5. They are a different class of tool. I'd never
consider taking my 4x5 to shoot a motor race just as I would not use an OM
for serious architectural work. Sure, there's plenty of subjects where
either format is suitable, they also have their unique attributes.
I suspect there are very few 35mm shooters who also do all their own
darkroom work. This facet of photography does not appeal to many people.
It's smelly, meticulous and generally solitary. It's also kind of expensive
and very time consuming. It is easier to just send the stuff out and have
someone else do it. "Interpretive" photography is all about control to
one's personal vision. 4x5 fully satisfies that need to control. It can be
done in roll formats, but it involves making compromises along the way. And
I won't even open the Pandora's box about image quality, nope....not going
there...... As for the retentive remark, I suppose any activity pursued to
an extremely high level of accomplishment can be so catagorized. So be it.
My workshop has many hammers, from a tiny 4 ounce ball peen to a mighty 20
pound sledge. As with hammers, the thinking photographer selects the right
camera, film and accessories to achieve the desired final image visualized
in his/her mind's eye.
John P
______________________________________
there is no "never" - just long periods of "not yet".
there is no "always" - just long periods of "so far".
George M. Anderson <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> First is an article all the way at the back of the magazine. It attempts
> to compare the 'essence' the 'je ne c'est quois' the 'philosophy', yea,
> the 'Gestalt' of
> two types of photography and photographers: 35mm shooters and 4x5
> photographers. The article, by Michael Johnston, makes some interesting
> points to ponder. For example, and paraphrasing: large format
> photography is really about
> printing. IOW rare is the large format user who doesn't also have a
> darkroom and agonize over getting the 'perfect interpretive print' from
> his original. Whereas 35mm folks are not so concerned about artistic
> interpretation, but rather they're about presenting the reality of the
> world to the viewer.
> Any thoughts?
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|