I made the mistake of thinking that a camera would improve my photographs and it is starting to make me a little bitter.
I have been shooting 6×6 medium format almost exclusively for the last two years and, looking back, I think I was starting to get a little restless. This seems to happen to me pretty often. I started working with color film again over the winter after a long hiatus and was beginning to flesh out a some ideas for a new project. Everything was clicking and I was very happy with my progress for the first couple of months.
Somewhere along the line, though, large format started calling out to me. The thing that probably put me over the line was seeing Joel Sternfeld’s show at Luhring Augustine last fall. Although I thought the prints were too big, the luscious descriptiveness and pure beauty that Sternfeld had captured in his Oxbow Archive had planted a seed in my mind.
My 4×5 camera had been sitting up on the shelf for over a year, unused. I had fallen in love with my Hasselblad in the meantime and hadn’t given the 4×5 a second thought for quite a while. But there’s always something, isn’t there? Some magic bullet that is somehow going to push my work to the next level, and I had gotten the idea that large format was it.
I have been using my 4×5 camera quite a bit over the last couple of months months, and the results haven’t been promising. While I’m out working, things feel good. I am taking the same pictures I’ve always taken. When I get home, however, the story changes. Something is getting lost in translation between the pictures that I think I am taking and the pictures that I actually take, and what’s left feels like a pale facsimile of my original intent.
The problem is that I know that large format is probably the right tool for images I am trying to create. The lush and descriptive image quality and the methodical nature of my process are pointing me in that direction. The question is how long I can continue to struggle before I give in.
Darius Himes writes about the choice of tools on his blog:
The methodical precision required by the 8×10, I’m arguing, leads to a methodical precision on the mental level. Because a relatively large amount of time is required to simply deal with the equipment, a corresponding large amount of mental time goes into the image—the type of image—that one makes. The camera physically and mentally slows you down, makes you more attentive in certain ways.
I think that’s exactly what I need. I often feel that my photos are just a little bit too loose. I know that one can develop the necessary attention without actually working with large format, but along with the other benefits, that feels like a step in the right direction for me. So, even though I am completely exhausted and discouraged at the moment, I am not quite ready to give up. Hopefully my moment of clarity is right around the corner, and the camera will start doing what I expect it to again soon.
Godspeed Dalton, godspeed !
Dalton, I feel you pain. I used to agonize over which camera to use for quite a while. A number of years back I made a decision for all of my long term personal work to simply stick with one format, one aspect ratio, one kind of film and use it for a long time. I have found a great deal of peace of mind with this approach.
For my commercial work, I use tools that are completely different. Having different tools for different purposes allows me to very effectively change my way of working for each situation. This was something I had problems with early in my career when I used the same tools for both commercial and personal work.
Sometimes it’s simply a matter of making a decision and sticking with it until you found your way. It seems that is what you’re doing.
The Hasselblad is a wonderful and very capable camera. Just slow down and ask yourself if you would take the same picture, if you had the 4×5 with you.
Do what you love. Enjoy what you do. Be who you are. Looking at art is good, but it doesn’t matter if you like someone else’s pictures. Make yours. I like Mike’s advice, but for me, one aspect ratio would be too limiting. Still, one camera, one film, and only a few lenses works for me. I’m very selective about the commercial work I do, which makes equipment choices easier. Hope this helps.
I believe in simplicity and knowing your tools, too. I usually stick with a single normal lens on whatever camera I am using, and I don’t like to switch back and forth between cameras often.
Ellen, you are probably right, I shouldn’t be basing my own approach on anyone else’s work. I keep going back to the fact that almost all of the photographs that I love were produced with a large format camera, though. Maybe what I really should be doing is looking into an 8×10?
Also related, from Alec Soth:
http://alecsothblog.wordpress.com/2006/09/17/faq-why-do-you-use-an-8×10-camera/
Dalton, I’ll bet you know the answer to your question. Maybe you can borrow an 8 x 10 or go out with a friend who has one and try it out.
Ellen, the funny thing is that I was ready to give up on the 4×5 until I sat down and wrote this post. Writing it all down gave me a chance to organize my thoughts and come to a different conclusion. The 8×10 is a long way down the road, I really need to be happy with 4×5 first, and I don’t have the money anyway!
I had a very long day out with the 4×5 yesterday. It will be a little while before I see the film, but it actually felt better than it has and I have high hopes. We’ll see what happens.
Not too long ago I was in that position. I dabbled in 4×5 occasionally but used a Hasselblad and DSLR exclusively for “real work”. Large format began calling to me, too.
The transition back to 4×5 was extremely difficult, and there were many instances where I considered going back to medium format film (although I was certainly done with DSLR).
The transition was difficult for me because I would often over-think my images. I would spend so much time fiddling with the camera (placement, movements, etc.) that the “magic”, for lack of a better word, was lost.
In my case it was a matter of acquiring a level of comfort with the format. The camera eventually became more of an extension of myself, and my images suddenly got a lot better.
In my experience, making the switch from medium format brings out a shift in the overall aesthetic which may or may not be what you want. Food for thought.
Camden is correct. Until you are comfortable with the camera, you will spend way too much time thinking about it(but that’s ok because you have to learn its language so give yourself a little more time). You can’t just put the camera to your eye and see how it looks. It takes awhile, at first. Having used one over ten years, I can have it out of my bag, get the lens on, and make an image as fast as I would with a smaller camera if speed is important. It just feels natural.
I think the important part of the Alec Soth quote is this, “the 300mm lens renders the world in a really unique way. But what I really love is the viewing process. The image on the ground glass is just so beautiful.”
If you geek like this, the camera is for you. If you are annoyed by the process, pick something else.
Camden, Jeff: thanks for your thoughts. I thought that I was getting comfortable with the camera, but I was just taking into account the physical aspects, i.e., setting it up, using the movements, etc. I am very comfortable with it in that regard.
It’s “seeing” with the camera that I don’t think I have down just yet. Like I said, there has been a disconnect between what I think I see and what I get on my film. I had anticipated the handling issue, but there was no way I could predict the latter.
I probably experienced the same thing with my Hasselblad and have just forgotten that fact.
I got my film back from last weekend. There are a few gems in there, and for the most part they look exactly how I expected them to. I’ll take that as a good sign.
Cheers,
Dalton