Large format, an elusive concept

[JimKasson]

The new Edmund Optics catalog came yesterday. Normally, I just file it away and look at it when I have a specific need. But today I started leafing through it, and noticed something in the industrial lens section. APS-H and FF are considered large format by the Edmund folks. Normal coverage appears to be that of a C-mount lens. C-mount lenses are built for the 8 mm and 16 mm film formats and the 1/3", 1/2", 2/3", 1", and 4/3" video formats, which corresponds to a range of image circles approximately from 5 to 22 mm in diameter.

Things are similar in the cine world. Arri's LF cameras have 36.70 mm x 25.54 mm sensors. Red's Monstro sensors are 40.96mm x 21.6mm.

I guess all things are relative when it comes to sensor size.

Jim

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

The new Edmund Optics catalog came yesterday. Normally, I just file it away and look at it when I have a specific need. But today I started leafing through it, and noticed something in the industrial lens section. APS-H and FF are considered large format by the Edmund folks. Normal coverage appears to be that of a C-mount lens. C-mount lenses are built for the 8 mm and 16 mm film formats and the 1/3", 1/2", 2/3", 1", and 4/3" video formats, which corresponds to a range of image circles approximately from 5 to 22 mm in diameter.

Things are similar in the cine world. Arri's LF cameras have 36.70 mm x 25.54 mm sensors. Red's Monstro sensors are 40.96mm x 21.6mm.

I guess all things are relative when it comes to sensor size.

I'm about 82% certain that I read somewhere in one of the trio of Ansel Adams instruction books* that in the early twentieth century, 4x5" film was considered / called medium format. Unfortunately, last time I went looking for that quote, I couldn't find it.

*I'm sure you know, but to be clear for any who may not: The Camera, The Negative, and The Print, the versions published in the early 1980s. And Adams fully knew where things were evolving: "I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them." The Negative, p. xiii (March 1981)

 

[JimKasson]

*I'm sure you know, but to be clear for any who may not: The Camera, The Negative, and The Print, the versions published in the early 1980s. And Adams fully knew where things were evolving: "I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them." The Negative, p. xiii (March 1981)

Ansel told me that he liked the tones in the poster version of Winter Sunrise, Sierra Nevada, from Lone Pine, scanned on a Scitex or similar scanner by an experienced operator, better than the ones in his darkroom prints. He said the scanner operator was able to do things he couldn't do chemically.

--
https://blog.kasson.com

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

You are not alone in recalling that 4x5 is medium format at one point. And the 120 roll film was known as small format. I recall that from somewhere or something or someone, long ago.....

And I know it changed somewhere along the timeline to where 4x5 became large format and the various 120 film using cameras became medium format.

And I seem to recall where 135 format was miniature format but then became small format.

So. Anyway. 8x10. Was always large format, right?

Stan

 

[JimKasson]

Hi,

You are not alone in recalling that 4x5 is medium format at one point. And the 120 roll film was known as small format. I recall that from somewhere or something or someone, long ago.....

And I know it changed somewhere along the timeline to where 4x5 became large format and the various 120 film using cameras became medium format.

And I seem to recall where 135 format was miniature format but then became small format.

So. Anyway. 8x10. Was always large format, right?

12x20 banquet cameras and bigger. That’s the real large format.

 

[darinb]

I don't know about the current versions, but I do remember seeing (and owning one or two) of those early posters and they were rather incredible. If I recall, I liked Clearing Winter Storm better as a poster than a print of the same size....

Funny to hear I was not alone.

--Darin

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...So. Anyway. 8x10. Was always large format, right?

12x20 banquet cameras and bigger. That’s the real large format.

Among those who still use sheet film, larger than 8x10 is conventionally referred to as Ultra Large Format (ULF).

 

[tjkoko]

Ansel told me that he liked the tones in the poster version of Winter Sunrise, Sierra Nevada, from Lone Pine,.....

I grew up close to that area and the views can be stupendous with the right cloud cover.

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

- Serious Mode On

Ah! I'd not heard that before.

Did they skip over Very and just jump to Ultra?

I ask because Very comes before Ultra in radio. Such as Low Frequency then Medium Frequency then High Frequency then Very High Frequency and then Ultra High Frequency.

- Serious Mode Off

Maybe we can now call small format Low Format?

There are also Very Low Frequencies such as Navies use to contact submerged vessels. Maybe we can use Very Low Format for cell phone camera sensors.

Stan

 

[AZ Steve]

Back to the world many/most of us live in, there's a frequent poster on FM who calls 44x33 "miniMF", because it's smaller than 645. I think the term is quite apt, but another poster referred to as comparable to dragging one's fingernails down a blackboard.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Hi,

- Serious Mode On

Ah! I'd not heard that before.

Did they skip over Very and just jump to Ultra?

I ask because Very comes before Ultra in radio. Such as Low Frequency then Medium Frequency then High Frequency then Very High Frequency and then Ultra High Frequency.

- Serious Mode Off

Yes, skip they did. Apparently not much overlap between ULF photographers and RF practitioners.

 

[Valued Customer]

Not sure about the origin date but 4x5 is large format according to Hasselblad.

Hasselblad defines medium format as anything lager than full frame (35mm equivalent):

"Medium format refers to the active image area, be it film or digital, with anything larger than the 24x36mm dimensions of 35mm film, also known as 35mm format, and smaller than the 4x5 inch, or large format, image area." -Hasselblad (think this document form 2018)

See, https://www.hasselblad.com/fr-fr/press/press-releases/2018/medium-format-advantages-karl-taylor/

 

[JimKasson]

Hi,

- Serious Mode On

Ah! I'd not heard that before.

Did they skip over Very and just jump to Ultra?

I ask because Very comes before Ultra in radio. Such as Low Frequency then Medium Frequency then High Frequency then Very High Frequency and then Ultra High Frequency.

- Serious Mode Off

Maybe we can now call small format Low Format?

There are also Very Low Frequencies such as Navies use to contact submerged vessels. Maybe we can use Very Low Format for cell phone camera sensors.

No SLF and ELF photographers?

 

[JimKasson]

Not sure about the origin date but 4x5 is large format according to Hasselblad.

Hasselblad defines medium format as anything lager than full frame (35mm equivalent):

"Medium format refers to the active image area, be it film or digital, with anything larger than the 24x36mm dimensions of 35mm film, also known as 35mm format, and smaller than the 4x5 inch, or large format, image area." -Hasselblad (think this document form 2018)

See, https://www.hasselblad.com/fr-fr/press/press-releases/2018/medium-format-advantages-karl-taylor/

So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF. And so is the Baby Rollei. And 6x17.

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

Well, if Keebler made cameras, it'd be ELF.

Stan

 

[TechTalk2]

Not sure about the origin date but 4x5 is large format according to Hasselblad.

4x5 inches seems reasonable. Fuji labels 33x44 mm as large format, which seems less reasonable.


Fuji Large Format

Hasselblad defines medium format as anything lager than full frame (35mm equivalent):

"Medium format refers to the active image area, be it film or digital, with anything larger than the 24x36mm dimensions of 35mm film, also known as 35mm format, and smaller than the 4x5 inch, or large format, image area." -Hasselblad (think this document form 2018)

See, https://www.hasselblad.com/fr-fr/press/press-releases/2018/medium-format-advantages-karl-taylor/

Seems like a reasonable overview of the current state of affairs as it has been in recent decades.

So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF.

Currently an obsolete and obscure large format size, but it had its day in the past.

And so is the Baby Rollei.

Currently an obsolete and obscure medium format size using 127 film, but there are folks who will cut 120 down to fit a 127 spool.

And 6x17.

Panoramic medium format, panoramic cameras have also been made for 35 mm (small format) film and large format sheet sizes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_format

 

[JimKasson]

So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF.

Currently an obsolete and obscure large format size, but it had its day in the past.

I had a 3 1/4 and 4 1/4 Speed Graphic in the 50's I didn't keep it long, because I had a hard time finding negative carriers, developing hangers, and the like in the newspaper darkrooms I was using. I switched to 4x5, and things got easier, but I didn't notice a big improvement in IQ.

 

[Valued Customer]

So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF.

Currently an obsolete and obscure large format size, but it had its day in the past.

I had a 3 1/4 and 4 1/4 Speed Graphic in the 50's ….. I switched to 4x5, and things got easier, but I didn't notice a big improvement in IQ.

What this due to the film, equipment, or user or combination of their three?

 

[JimKasson]

So 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 is MF.

Currently an obsolete and obscure large format size, but it had its day in the past.

I had a 3 1/4 and 4 1/4 Speed Graphic in the 50's ….. I switched to 4x5, and things got easier, but I didn't notice a big improvement in IQ.

What this due to the film, equipment, or user or combination of their three?

Hard to say, but 4x5 isn’t all that much bigger than 3 1/4 x 4 1/4. About 40% in area or 19% in diagonal.

 

[just Tony]

Back when Edmund’s catalogs were printed at about 5”x7” and were still moving a lot of WW-II military surplus optical gear I think they had some aerial reconnaissance lenses that covered the small 5” wide roll film square format. I had one of those lenses which had the characteristic uranium or thorium discoloring.

E-O nowadays offers a lot of machine vision equipment; in that field is there a format larger than 24x36?