Featured History Tom Cobbs & The Savage Truth Of Large Format Film

Hello,

Shooting indoors with a background of incoming light is always difficult. The hand held light meters go immediately to the bright light coming in from the windows and will make the exposure reading slightly darker to compensate for the bright light. I always used a skylight filter on a fast 1.4 listed 50mm lens and with the meter set at very slow speeds, shot the Kodak Tri X for best results in low light arenas.

But, for everyday usage in B/W films for enlarging, the Plus X branded film was the slowest at the time and gave me the least amount of grain when enlarging the 35mm to an 8x10 print or larger. (Also, used indoors with a tri pod for less grainy enlargements) The largest poster I made was for my wife’s brother. It was a 3 foot long poster print of his OT Camaro. On a bright and sunny day, the Ektachrome color slide was perfect. The blue sky and green car came out perfectly. But, I also took some B/W shots and used those for the enlargement poster.

The hand held exposure meter was spot on, but a lot of the times, using the camera exposure readings were fine for prints for magazines and to give away as a thank you to the owners of the custom motorcycles and hot rod cars. Interior photos with just the light bulb for the glow was cause for a hand held meter reading. But, who carries around a meter in the pocket when a spur of the moment photo is taken? Ha!


Jnaki

But, the pesky bright light coming into this room was a problem washing out the original spot/photo composure. So, various angles and adjustments to the B/W film had to be made for a better focus shot of the reflection. YRMV

(50 mm lens 1.4 Pentax camera using the built in meter for light reading, using the B/W film camera)

The color slide film version was almost the same spot and angle photo, but the B/W version came out better in a print version.
The B/W version

Note:
The instant gratification of a larger film format gave me the clarity of photographs. The darkroom prints had the extra clear photos in B/W, when I used to go to normal size prints and enlargements beyond the 5x7 and 8x10 range. The average print was now able to go to 11x14 with clarity of the negative. Several 16x20 prints were tried, but even the larger film format has limits.

But, ever try to shoot a side moving hot rod on a street scene and get the clarity needed of the car and a moving blur in the background? The larger negative also requires a larger camera, not called a Hassleblad. YRMV

 

What would Ansel Adams do?
Sorry boss, I have nothing, hell, I bought a new Canon AE1 in the 80's and couldn't grasp that whole deal!

 

WOW! I never realized you could do that on here, yeah, amazing photo, thank you for the tip!

 

I don't know if it's the framing. lighting or your behind the scenes fiddling, but that latest one is a lot closer. Looking at it, the exact year or decade doesn't jump out. A white border with May 1962 wouldn't immediately ring false.
Most early pics were less in focus and a bit more grainy, but as shown in your Tom Cobb posts, this is not true of the masters.

 

Once Upon A Time, Funny you should mention that.
I lived in LA in that time frame and it's amazing how that film captured the sun, smog and even the traffic in the road shots. There was a lot of effort put in and it showed. It transported me right back there to the point where it took me out of the movie for a bit, trying to spot faults. Amazing.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHNdxHADRy8

This one is a view of the work put in thru it all.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkIvUIOcO_w

 

From another Tom Cobbs post: a large film Graflex Camera and the trusty Leica rangefinder 35mm camera. Not a bad combination to shoot clear photos at the time.

Hello,

When we were growing up those little magazines were mesmerizing. As little kids, it was something we had never seen before. But, in reality, it was probably the camera work from the staff of the magazines, which included Bob D’Olivio. As we continued to read the magazines, it was the cars and action shots we liked, regardless of who took the photos.

But as we know, he is also well known for using a twin lens Rolliflex camera. At the time, the Rolliflex was the top of the line in this larger format. Then, one cannot go into camera work without using a Hassleblad Camera for all purposes.

Perhaps, this is what my brother wanted to start with his first 35mm camera in 1958. With his new Nikon F camera, he was off and running shooting black and white as it was less expensive to develop and print. But, he liked the color transparencies for real life photos.

I was stuck trying to get my dad’s Graflex huge camera to work, but failed, as it was too large to lug around.

Jnaki

The photos from the Peterson Collection are so clear as to top quality processing. Ever try to shoot an action photo of a hot rod coming at you or a side shot with blur in the background? Using a twin lens camera? YRMV

Some of the other cameras were shown in the random photos still floating around.

 

Back when the process of taking a picture was an art form unto itself!