Wow, everything seems so much more... heroic? Romantic?

so cool!

wow these photos are amazing

I really enjoyed this shoot. By doing this with old equipment, I think it hammers home that photography is an art, and that simply owning a camera doesn't make you a photographer. I know if I were shooting F1, I'd be using DSLRs with a long lens, and rattling off *thousands* of frames, picking out only the best. With these old boys your supply of frames is limited to what you brought, and you don't want to waste on a throwaway shot. Takes time to compose, and compensation for the technical challenges. I really do like this

Stunning!

Well done!!!

These photos seem to convey motion, atmosphere and passion that photos taken with modern equipment does not.

WOW!!! forgot how good black and white could be...

Wow! The composition! The grain! The lighting! The purity of all these things with the unsaid beauty of black and white came together to make something absolutely amazing! Great photography, great photographer!

I don't understand all the fuss? Graflex cameras are still quite capable... SLRs even more than more recent press cameras (yep, William Folmer did a magnificent job back then, his 1905 cameras are pretty much usable today, especially if you replace original back with Graflok from 40 years later). It's just that you have to do EVERYTHING manually. If the guy wouldn't be bitten by heepstuh and used modern lens with color transparencies, his images would be nearly indistinguishable from digital, at least in web size. If you look at original Graflex images from 100 years ago, you'll find them looking pretty close to modern ones. They did photograph baseball then, too. They did it one frame at a time and used 5×7" and 4×5" glass plates (while celluloid film was available, a lot of people preferred glass until early-1920s).

I shot 8x10 for quite a few years. The main thing that irritates me about this article is the fact that the top shot, of the photographer, has him posing with the camera..... with no lens on it. The portraits are nice. The rest of the shots? Interesting but mediocre, IMHO. Jean-Jacques Lartigue was doing better as a young boy, in 1905 with similar gear.

Very romantic and beautiful!

Dang!

So much quality for something so old

Cool stuff!

His camera can only shoot 20 photographs? NO! That is totally wrong! He can shoot as many photographs as he wants as long as he has enough 4x5" sheet film holders or a device that holds 8. I own both kinds, so I know. Most likely his limitation is that he only has enough 4x5" sheet film holders to expose 20 sheets of film before he has to head back to his darkroom. Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA Skype: AtlantaTerry