4x5 and 9x12

Hello everybody! Another question from someone wanting to jump into LF:

I sometimes see a few view cameras which mention a size of 9x12 (and I am just assuming that they are in centimeters). However, I don't think I've heard (not that I know a lot about LF at all) of 9x12 film. I did my math and noticed that 9cm x 12cm would be just a bit smaller than 4in x 5in.

Are these 9x12 cameras totally different from 4x5 cameras or is this just a case of English vs Metric? Are there really 9x12 film available today?

Or, would it be possible that the 9x12 cameras use the same 4x5 film but produce just a slightly smaller image (as in 3.5in x 4.7in)?

Am I making any sense here at all?

- Albert

Albert Ramos said:

Hello everybody! Another question from someone wanting to jump into LF:

I sometimes see a few view cameras which mention a size of 9x12 (and I am just assuming that they are in centimeters). However, I don't think I've heard (not that I know a lot about LF at all) of 9x12 film. I did my math and noticed that 9cm x 12cm would be just a bit smaller than 4in x 5in.

Are these 9x12 cameras totally different from 4x5 cameras or is this just a case of English vs Metric? Are there really 9x12 film available today?

Or, would it be possible that the 9x12 cameras use the same 4x5 film but produce just a slightly smaller image (as in 3.5in x 4.7in)?

Am I making any sense here at all?

- Albert

Click to expand...

Yes they are different. 9X12 was the old time European standard. There is limited or almost no film made that size. Adox likely makes some. Ilford might cut it once a year. Another problem is that it doesn't fit right in any modern developing tanks or tubes like JOBO etc. 4X5 is the standard and as things get less and less available for film it becomes more important to just stick with the size that will be around for a while.

Albert,

Did you ever tell us where you're located? Are you currently using 4x5 or film? We have a strong interest in promoting a wider choice of imaging tools. Film offers character not found in digital media. Amazingly one can combine the best of both worlds and cross from one to another.

Asher

BTW, Jim is a great source of information on imaging especially with any lens made in the past 125 years for large format photography and with an emphasis on finding surprises in gems that "little green men" bring him.

Asher Kelman said:

Albert,

Did you ever tell us where you're located? Are you currently using 4x5 or film? We have a strong interest in promoting a wider choice of imaging tools. Film offers character not found in digital media. Amazingly one can combine the best of both worlds and cross from one to another.

Asher

BTW, Jim is a great source of information on imaging especially with any lens made in the past 125 years for large format photography and with an emphasis on finding surprises in gems that "little green men" bring him.

Click to expand...

Hi Asher! As I've stated in my Introduce Yourself thread, I'm in Florida right now after having migrated from the Philippines. I have just started using my Bronicas as my comeback to the film medium, with only 35mm as my experience prior to going digital.

I am actually interested in what you have just stated - combining both worlds - thus my few questions about film scanning in the other threads.

I haven't tried using 4x5 yet but the plunge is becoming more imminent by the day, especially since that interest is strongly stoked by this forum!

And with what you said about Jim, I now feel humbled that he was the first to reply to my question. Thanks a lot Jim!

Jim Galli said:

Yes they are different. 9X12 was the old time European standard. There is limited or almost no film made that size. Adox likely makes some. Ilford might cut it once a year. Another problem is that it doesn't fit right in any modern developing tanks or tubes like JOBO etc. 4X5 is the standard and as things get less and less available for film it becomes more important to just stick with the size that will be around for a while.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply Jim! Would you say that the 3x4 and 2x3 formats that I also occasionally see mentioned have suffered the same fate as the 9x12?

Albert Ramos said:

Thanks for the reply Jim! Would you say that the 3x4 and 2x3 formats that I also occasionally see mentioned have suffered the same fate as the 9x12?

Click to expand...

Yes. I had a 3 1/4X4 1/4 but let it go for that exact reason.

Albert,

Let us know your needs. If you need an inexpensive camera Will Thompson has Toyos, Crown Graphics, Calumets that he'd let you have for a fair price! If you need lenses just ask. I'm sure between a bunch of us here us we could find what you need!

Asher

The camera's, therefore the outer size of the film holders should be the same - entring in the so called °international back°, but they' re a bit diferent in their internal size.

I've still two 9 x 12 - film holders (from Linhof), and about 30 - 40 of 4/5'; they all entered in the sinars. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the german industry insisted on the 9 x 12; therefore I had the 9 x 12 for the Agfa-ortho 25, as they weren't available in 4/5.

I'm not sure about the reason for using the Agfa-ortho 25 anymore: developed with some low-contrast developers, it became a very sharp °half-tone° film, similar to the Tech-pan 25, so making trannies out of b & w-negs might have been its use.

As already stated, I'd go with the 4/5-filmholders.

In France we used the names 9x12 and 4x5 interchangeably to designate 4x5 cameras. French people like to use the metric system even though 9x12 is not exactly 4x5... So you may have find 4x5's that are called 9x12's. Just check to be sure what you really have. The best way to check is to stick a 4x5 holder in the camera and see if it fits. Empiricism reigns supreme here!

Also, because film is dying, I wouldn't buy anything but a 4x5 now. It's the one format that is surviving well because many photographers still use it. The other formats either may already be or will soon become impossible to find.

I know that:

No one wants advice. Only Corroboration
John Steinbeck

But I thought I'd try regardless ;-)

Alain Briot said:

Also, because film is dying, I wouldn't buy anything but a 4x5 now. It's the one format that is surviving well because many photographers still use it. The other formats either may already be or will soon become impossible to find.

I know that:

No one wants advice. Only Corroboration
John Steinbeck

But I thought I'd try regardless ;-)

Click to expand...

I don't know about that Alan, there is a certain joy to holding an 8x10 negative. (and an overwhelming desire to sell off everything else the first time you have a good 16x20 negative, makes you forget about schlepping a 50 lb. camera and 30 lb tripod around looking for subjects that are less then 50' from the road) If film cost is a major concern (when isnt' it?), lith film (Arista APHS or if you prefer thicker, Ultrafine .007" thick lith works fantastically.

Erie Patsellis said:

I don't know about that Alan, there is a certain joy to holding an 8x10 negative. (and an overwhelming desire to sell off everything else the first time you have a good 16x20 negative, makes you forget about schlepping a 50 lb. camera and 30 lb tripod around looking for subjects that are less then 50' from the road) If film cost is a major concern (when isnt' it?), lith film (Arista APHS or if you prefer thicker, Ultrafine .007" thick lith works fantastically.

Click to expand...

Hi Erie,

Do you think we can use this argument to convince film manufacturer's to change their marketing decisions ?

;-)

9x12cm and 4x5" filmholders generally fit the same cameras (with the exception of some older 9x12 folding plate cameras that use single-sided holders), but the film size is different. 9x12 is generally harder to find than 4x5", but perhaps there are more 9x12 films available in Europe. The same is true of 2.25x3.25" and 6.5x9cm--the filmholders have the same external dimensions, but the film size is different.

There may be fewer films available as you go up in format, but it's important to remember that you don't need so many options if you don't have to worry about small format issues like grain, and if you are generally using the camera on a tripod.