Pesonally, mine is an 8x10. Didn't even realized they made them bigger.
2007-12-19 02:03:35 · 4 answers · asked by Mere Mortal 7 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Photography
The largest I have used is 10x8 though not regularly. I used 5x4 with a reducing back for 6cm x 9cm for much of my work. These cameras have front and back movements, which was the main reason for their use. I also used a 6x17cm panoramic camera.
Life is more interesting using these large format film cameras particularly if they are being humped around for landscape work.
I had them boxed and the box mounted to a modified rucksack frame. With suitable tripod I had just over 70lb weight to carry.
I don't do it now!
At least I didn't have the weight of spare batteries to carry as well!
2007-12-19 02:35:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think 8 x 10 was the size of the "Big Bertha" , a large wooden sheet film camera on wheels we used in studio for brides black and white newspaper portraits when I first started. We could make it do half sheets as well. An old gentleman from Poland once told me that when he started you ordered what size photo you wanted and that size negative was shot. They always did contacts. I'm guessing they had larger than 8 x 10 there.
2007-12-19 02:13:15 · answer #2 · answered by Perki88 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Carleton Watkins used an 18"x22" "Mammoth Camera." But that was over a hundred years ago.
Personally, I've only seen about a 8"x10" in a camera shop.
2007-12-19 07:08:50 · answer #3 · answered by electrosmack1 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not an answer, but am wondering what is a "normal" lens for one of those monsters--300 mm?
(What's the burst rate on those cameras anyway). :-)
2007-12-19 04:18:14 · answer #4 · answered by Pooky™ 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋