How Many Pros use LF?

[John Layton]

Lots of LF location work back in the day...hauling power packs/lights/backdrops - testing with Polaroid and starting with gray card/color card snaps to establish processing/printing color balance. Architecture/industrial/products/people. Did two or three weddings completely with a Crown Graphic (all Tri-X) - got pretty quick slinging holders (no bag-mags for me!).

Then again, my career had its beginnings in the mid 1970's...and if I were starting out today I'm sure things would be different - "pro gear" wise. A bit of irony...now that I am "retired," that the bulk of my (non SS) income comes from LF work - enough, so far, to add my schedule C to our taxes...but who knows how long this will last.

[Bernice Loui]

There was a time way back when... Photographer's source books were one of the means of doing PR and promo.

circa 1993, 1996.


Sample image:

Chicago 1996:


California 1993:


San Francisco Bay Area (south of SF was known as one of the national Photo centers).



These Foto source books serve as a reminder of who were the majority view camera users and why at times extreme technical demands were made on lighting, monorail camera and related, film, processing and more, the creative art they produced as commercial product, the high standards they held and what customers expected back then.. Compare the creative works produced then to now. IMO, the level of expectation, creativity and .. has gone down hill. Majority done in data -vs- done mostly in camera back in the day.

Seems these days, view camera folks battle over camera, format size, lenses and.... instead of focusing on creative work and what is possible.

Pro simply means getting paid for services provided.


Bernice

[LabRat]

Also, remember the 70's/80's/90's, the LF "community" was deeply divided, where the "pros" had their "time is money" attitude and was expecting a drum scan of a large piece of film and charge more for a bigger film... The amateurs would like to laugh at how most pro results were straight out of a Kodak manual, and the pros would laugh at the "amateurs" as apostles of AA and Fred Picker trying to find the tripod holes of the "rocks & stumps" club, with their woody old cameras and "zone system"... Little love between...

Then there were the "collectors" who had a room museum full of cases of Victorian gear (they never used), and would gasp at the idea that there were "users" out there, and the "geeks" who rarely shot much outside, as they were too busy shooting resolution targets etc...

Despite not having the industry support of yesteryear, I think the "community" is closer than it ever was before... ;-)

Steve K

[Bernice Loui]

Ug, those where the era correct memories... They are part of my LF view camera history. Mixed with a long time friend who owned one of the largest color labs in SF back then...

Not just the Foto community was divided, it was tribal in the worst way. The Foto stores were divided in similar tribal ways.

The collectors made head spinning back then and continues to do that to this day.. Been invited to view the collection of these trophy collectors. Part of their collecting is wheeling and dealing vintage Foto gear... which continues to this day.

Guess once you're indoctrinated into ways of practice, then actually doing the work and had to produce a specific quality level of work, all that tends to stick even the do-er with the passage of time.

The community has become closer due to the passing of what LF and view camera commercial work once was. What remains are folks that share enough similarity with their view camera interest to get together enough..

Part of the motivation for posting that vintage Foto source book stuff is to offer those new to this LF view camera stuff some tiny window into the way LF and view camera images once were.


Bernice

Also, remember the 70's/80's/90's, the LF "community" was deeply divided, where the "pros" had their "time is money" attitude and was expecting a drum scan of a large piece of film and charge more for a bigger film... The amateurs would like to laugh at how most pro results were straight out of a Kodak manual, and the pros would laugh at the "amateurs" as apostles of AA and Fred Picker trying to find the tripod holes of the "rocks & stumps" club, with their woody old cameras and "zone system"... Little love between...

Then there were the "collectors" who had a room museum full of cases of Victorian gear (they never used), and would gasp at the idea that there were "users" out there, and the "geeks" who rarely shot much outside, as they were too busy shooting resolution targets etc...

Despite not having the industry support of yesteryear, I think the "community" is closer than it ever was before... ;-)

Steve K

[John Layton]

Yes...a divided community - the trick for me was walking both sides of that path...giving each the attention and respect that they deserved.

[Tobias Key]

I think it depends how you define 'pro'. I don't think there is much traditional commercial work being done on large format, but there are plenty of film youtubers shooting large format and earning at least some money out of it. I certainly think that the film community is producing quite a lot of interesting work now. That is more important to the survival of the medium than any narrow definition of what a 'pro' is. When the first wave of serous digital cameras took hold, there was very little good work around, at least on social media where the next generation of shooters are recruited. On the whole I am optimistic the community is growing, thanks in no small part to intrepid producing a camera that can produce excellent results for very little money.

[Willie]

Sally Mann

Paul Caponigro

Paula Chamlee

At least three I know of.

Does William Wegman still use a 20x24 Polaroid?

[Michael R]

I suppose I don’t really understand the question. Suppliers, EK, Ilford, a few others, the camera makers and darkroom equipment makers of course. Practitioners - there are working artists. I doubt LF (or even film) is used by anyone for client-based work. That ship has long since sailed.

I don’t think people look down on hobbyist/enthusiast/amateur status. Unless I’ve missed the point here. I don’t see what that has to do with how many people earn a living with LF.

[Corran]

I don’t think people look down on hobbyist/enthusiast/amateur status. Unless I’ve missed the point here. I don’t see what that has to do with how many people earn a living with LF.

Take a gander at photography forums or groups catering to the average portrait, wedding, or commercial photo hobbyist/amateur/pro demographic and you might be surprised. In my view, photographers are the worst people in existence when it comes to community discussion and chat. I remember the old days as a guy who kinda got thrust into pro photography work out of necessity (no one in the area doing it and suddenly I was overrun with requests since I was competent) and being part of a few of these. Nikon vs. Canon arguments, passionate m43 users, pixel-peeping and yes, a budding film vs. digital debate that still gets brought up with the new generation of film users coming from digital. Absolutely mind-numbing, catty comments from an ocean of "photographers" defending their ego. It rears its head here, too on occasion. I was also part of a pro audio community for years and it was not nearly as bad. I generally dislike the photographer communities catering to digital folks mostly due to how terrible the personalities are. I imagine that was how it was decades ago too, but without the digital part.

[Michael R]

Thanks for the explanation. I’ve never been in the client-based photography sphere so I wasn’t aware of this. The only photo forums I’ve ever been involved with are this one and APUG/Photrio. I’ve definitely seen a lot of crap and snobby nonsense but it’s predominantly the usual forum foolishness of other hobbyists with delusions.

Take a gander at photography forums or groups catering to the average portrait, wedding, or commercial photo hobbyist/amateur/pro demographic and you might be surprised. In my view, photographers are the worst people in existence when it comes to community discussion and chat. I remember the old days as a guy who kinda got thrust into pro photography work out of necessity (no one in the area doing it and suddenly I was overrun with requests since I was competent) and being part of a few of these. Nikon vs. Canon arguments, passionate m43 users, pixel-peeping and yes, a budding film vs. digital debate that still gets brought up with the new generation of film users coming from digital. Absolutely mind-numbing, catty comments from an ocean of "photographers" defending their ego. It rears its head here, too on occasion. I was also part of a pro audio community for years and it was not nearly as bad. I generally dislike the photographer communities catering to digital folks mostly due to how terrible the personalities are. I imagine that was how it was decades ago too, but without the digital part.