[Largeformat] Re: Elliot !! Weight of Deardorff, etc.

[Vic Culver <vic@exis.net>]

From: Vic Culver <vic@exis.net>

OH, DEAR!  I sense a serious discussion about to rise up and smite the
jollity I've seen the past couple of days (since I signed up!).  In
response to a side comment Lee made -- I'd surely like to have a serious
student.  I did not teach in the arts, but rather in Professional Education
(Ed. Psych., Psychoeducational Diagnosis, etc.) but the college WOULD
permit me to teach short courses for non-credit.  It seems that the quality
of the product is not the proof of a photographer, but rather his
credentials (how did E. Weston EVER get that Guggenheim grant???), and
lacking formal credentials I could not teach 'for credit' classes.  Well,
the dozen or so I taught over the past few years have produced not a single
soul who had any aspirations beyond an inexpensive 35 mm with a big zoom
lens (which was more often than not BORROWED for the 'class'), no visible
appreciation of anything approaching a fine print (how fine can a 35 MM
negative BE blown up to MURAL proportions???), and no willingness to do the
drudge work of learning craft!  MY FAULT, let me say it first!  And LORD, I
hope you don't think I'm comparing my stuff to Weston's, but If I were a
better TEACHER I might have inflamed one of those young folks!  But the
best prints I have, and the best of the fine prints I have collected didn't
do it.  A one roll shooting assignment (to provide grist for the darkroom
and printing phase, where the photographer gets to make the most of his or
her luck (OK, skill) with the machine, produced maybe a dozen exposures
each -- and inspection by Fred's PROPER-PROOF method revealed not much
worth looking at!  I was generally glad when the two week experience was
over and done.  Some time would go by and then I'd decide to try again!
Or, more likely, I was enticed to do it because the program NEEDED short
'courses' to make the experiential learning program work.

Send me one serious student and I'll carry HIS (or HER) 4 x 5!  Then we can
become friends and work together as Ken and his son seem to do -- and we'll
BOTH grow.
Lecture ended.  

Hey, I KNOW there are some great students out there (aren't we ALL) and I
see them in some of the publications -- like the Ilford teaching materials,
etc. Maybe you have to give bona fide academic credit before they will join
in -- and we did NOT have a formal photography program at our college, so
maybe the real fanatics were either out making photographs (ala Weston) or
however comfortably ensconsed in a formal program somewhere else.  I hope
so.  Good luck to them and may God bless them!

Let's look at some prints!  Who'll go first?  Vic


At 12:08 PM 1/2/1999 -0600, you wrote:
>From: Lee Carmichael <click@flash.net>
>
>
>I am not Ken but it occurs to me that a Sherpa or two is the answer.  If
>you are disenchanted with hauling a 4x5 nearly any 8x10 I am aware of will
>certainly not thrill you.  The key is get a younger person to carry it for
>you.  Surely you are cagey enough to trick some person wanting to learn
>about photography.  =:-o).
>
>
>At 11:56 AM 1/2/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>From: Vic Culver <vic@exis.net>
>>
>>For Ken:  Well, I'm 59 and a half -- brand newly retired from the academic
>>wars, and my back goes out more than I do!  I've become so disenchanted
>>with hauling the weight of the 4 x 5 and etc. that I use my Pentax 6 x 7
>>system nor more than I do the 4 x 5.  But then I have to do the enlarging
>>thing -- mostly to something under 8 x 10.  I did the same with the 4 x 5
>>only could get by with some contact prints.  What I NEED is an 8 x 10 the
>>size of my 6 x 7 so I could get rid of the enlarger stuff and do contacts
>>all the time!  ;-)   Happy New Year to all!  Vic
>>
>>
>>At 12:26 PM 1/1/1999 -0600, you wrote:
>>>From: "Ken Hough" <k4sb@niia.net>
>>>
>>>Elliot !!
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>I just love my Deardorffs. My 8x10 goes EVERYWHERE !! My 11x14 and my
12x20 
>>>Deardorffs are my 50 yard cameras. That means I don't carry them farther
>>than 50 yards 
>>>from my van !  I'm 44 and got a suspect back. ( I suspect it will "go out"
>>at anytime ! )
>>>I do have a pull along cart that really helps. The 11 x 14 weighs around
>>33 lbs and the 12 X 
>>>20 weighs 37 lbs. See what I mean ? Oh, I use old lenses that are a bit
>>less bulky than newer 
>>>glass.
>>>Ken Hough
>>>
>>>Date sent:      	Fri, 01 Jan 1999 13:02:20 -0400
>>>From:           	"Elliot M. Puritz, MD" <drpuritz@li.net>
>>>To:             	Largeformat@onelist.com
>>>Send reply to:  	Largeformat@onelist.com
>>>Subject:        	[Largeformat] Weight of Deardorff, etc.
>>>
>>>> From: "Elliot M. Puritz, MD" <drpuritz@li.net>
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Lee:  Thanks for the response.  Yes, the tripod does add considerabe 
>>>> weight to an already hefty package.  Looking forward to Ken's response.  
>>>> 
>>>> Another point to consider is if the stability of the camera is a major
>>issue.   
>>>> Suspect that at some times it is based upon one of our previous member's 
>>>> comments about the B and J...but, again, are all the movements needed?
>Of 
>>>> course, I know that that one time you have them it is great, but for 
>>>> everyday landscape work?
>>>> 
>>>> I don't know yet, Lee, about alternative methods/processes.  Have 
>>>> absolutely no experience in such endeavors.  One of the things that
>>appealed 
>>>> to me about larger format is the ability to make contact prints, and
>>bypass 
>>>> the enlarger "stage" with the expense and image degradation possible.
Of 
>>>> course, I know it could be argued that the ability to get creative with 
>>>> printing is one aspect of large format photography that our colleagues 
>>>> enjoy.
>>>> 
>>>> Suppose, as is the case with virtually everything we do and experience, 
>>>> life is a series of "tradeoffs"!
>>>> 
>>>> Elliot
>>>
>>>******Ken Hough Photographic Repair******
>>>  Specializing in Deardorff Refinishing
>>>   Lens Recementing and Shutter repair
>>>   Contribitor to McKeowns Price Guide
>>>           Deardorff Section
>>>   Custom machined Photographic items
>>>                Est. 1980

>As usual,
>Lee Carmichael
>
>check out http://www.pgtopg.com/filmbytes

>