Bob Werre

Sorry some terms I haven't used in a while either--the stove pipe is simply a viewer that allows you to look down at the image--Rollie, Yashica, Mamiya, Fuji 6 x 8 and Hasseblad all had them. It's a bit like looking down a stove pipe into a room. Generally it's a fold out style that folded down for storage. I think the very early Graflex was more of the light proof tent to prevent flare and washing out the ground glass image. The typical 4 x 5 press type cameras had several ways of determining what the camera would cover...first there was a open metal frame that pulled up that was generally for aerials and quick grab shots. Then they had a rangefinder viewer someplace to view the image through a small scope--more accurate, and lastly, you unfolded the back of the ground glass then started composing and focusing via the ground glass. Obviously this required some time and a tripod. You had to open the lens diaphram + open the shutter, then compose + focus, then close the shutter, then select your aperture, then insert a film holder, pull the darkslide and make your shot then replace the darkslide. With chrome films 4 shots (two holders) bracketed worked out well. When you had people to shoot you had to have a routine worked out so to not screw up because you shot blanks or double exposures thus creating unhappy customers!

RichardQ Loc: Colorado

During the mid- to late 1950s, I criss-crossed the United States lugging a 4x5 Graphic View with three lenses and focusing cloth, 15 film holders, a flashgun, two flash extensions with collapsing stands, 25 or 30 Press 25 flashbulbs, and a Tiltall tripod. I was a staff photographer for Interstate Photographers, covering industrial advertising assignments for major companies and large ad agencies. I flew almost every day, in times when there were no security guards, the inflight meals actually were meals because the flights were slower, and I could go directly to the gate and pay with a "flight check" (a punched card that I filled in right there, writing in the flight number and date). It was a different time. But the pace was killing., because I had to strip my holders in hotel closets, package the exposed films in sealed and labeled boxes, and find a post office to mail them back to the New York office, before I could reload my holders for the next day's shoot (or shoots) and buy more flashbulbs in a drug store. Then I might have time for a late dinner before bed. I certainly had no time to develop or print any of my photos, and saw them only when the darkroom crew saved some prints for me, or when I opened a magazine on a plane and saw an ad that used one of my shots. I loved that Graphic View, except for the attached ad photo of a Traveloader handling large pipes. The art director wanted a low-angle perspective, so I had to suspend the view camera upside down under the tripod and sprawl on the ground while focusing, adjusting the lens opening, cocking the shutter, inserting the film holders, pulling the slides, etc., etc. I swore I would never again try a low angle upside-down view camera shot. Note that I used the tilts on both shots to achieve maximum depth of field.

tvbob

The Speed Graphics had two shutters. There was the front, between the lens shutter, which sometimes had a flash sync connector, and there was the rear focal plane shutter, which, as I remember, you had to wind up and select a combination of numbers and letters (i.e. A4) to select the shutter speed. The focal plane speeds were 'odd' by todays standards (such as a 1/240th sec) and one had to be careful to close the focal plane shutter and be certain that the front shutter was set to 'T' (time) to keep it locked open. After closing the rear and opening the front, one would insert the sheet film packet and remove the light slide from it. After taking the exposure, one reinserted the slide (making sure that the raised dots on it's top were reversed so you knew it was exposed. By the way, most Speed Graphics also had an external rangefinder if you chose not to use the rear ground glass. It also had a wire frame sportsfinder which provided only framing info... Piece of cake...

ray manclark

Hey Fred! Don't take any notice of certain sarcastic bods, which unfortunately exist on this blog. One finds them everywhere, just like bad drivers.

Dennis833 Loc: Australia

Nagaoka, Gowland, Linhof Technika, Horseman, Sinar, Ebony. All 4x5". I still have my personally modified Linhof and would still prefer to use it if I could buy a reasonably priced 4x5 digital back. Just out of interest is anyone shooting 4x5" colour negatives, scanning and converting them into digital positives in photoshop?

Hal81 Loc: Bucks County, Pa.

Good luck with your book Jennifer.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Ah, okay ... got it ... complicated style you used to have to follow, there, Bob ....

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Yes, own two 4x5" as well. Own one studio rail 4x5" view camera, one 4x5" folding field camera.

Used 4x5"
Used 8x10"
Used a vertical 20x24" copy camera with a 8x10" reduction back.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Very nice, Richard ... worth all the discomfort you might well have experienced ....

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Yes, Mike ... so have I too ...

bob44044 Loc: Ohio

Yes, 4x5 and 8x10

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Sounds like it, Bob ...

They still use that raised dot thing on all film slides, you know ...

ChackbayGuy Loc: South Louisiana

Back in the 70s, all film, I had several 35mm Topcon systems, a Mamiya 2 1/4 twin lens, a Speed Graphic 4X5 and a Kodak 8X10 with a tilt back and a straight back, plus a full dark room. The 2 1/4 was my main camera for weddings, rarely sold anything bigger than 11X14. The 4X5 mostly was used to restore old photos. Would shoot the picture, touch up the negative, then shoot a paper negative for further touch up. Most people also like me to "antique" the final result so lots of sepia toning! Much longer process in the pre-digital days, not to mention having to get to the darkroom before you were sure of what you got. Never did a blow up beyond 24X?? (suddenly can't even remember that) as most common for the restored photographs was 11X14. Did most of my shooting in all formats with Plus X, Tri X (sometimes pushed in processing to extend the "iso", aka ASA rating, and Kodachrome 100 or 200. The "business" was a sideline to my full time job as a construction engineer as the hobby got too expensive to support with my "real job".

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Sure he did, 8x10", 4x5", 6x6 cm Hasselblad even. Likely for his earliest articles, photo essays, and portfolios, a 11x14". Perhaps you are thinking of Edward Weston, he was known to always shoot a 11x14" and contact print everything. Though, I've seen prints of his other than 11x14". So go figure.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Beseler got out of the 35mm camera business! ... Got too expensive for many of us ... it's way outta hand, now!