Being vintage, I grew up on film and "real" photo paper, you know the kind that was around before resin coated paper, took hours to wash and then dry. Getting a true glossy surface meant ferrotyping (sp?) a print = having a big, shiny, hot, metal drum that you attached the print to by having a big cotton blanket tightly adhered to it and "baking" the shine onto the emulsion.
4 x 5 and 8 x 10 were commonplace, 2 1/4 and 35 mm were not really serious photography... especially if it was in color!
Personally, photographs on paper were of little interest to me when I was in college.
I hated color photography since it never felt like I saw color.
Consequently, I was in love with original photographic processes and spent most of my time making emulsions from hard to find and decipher formulas.
This WAS - REAL photography!
I could then coat all kinds of materials and substrates...
I then spent many years painting and drawing on all my b/w photographs to create color the way I felt, saw it.
In grad school, one of my professors was a proponent of 35 mm photography.
He believed that if you used a point light source (very focused beam of light) in the enlarger, you could make large prints that were equivalent to a similar print made from a 4 x 5 negative. The focused light wrapped itself around the fine grain film in a way that allowed one to make big prints from a small negative. In many ways, the Point Source method was akin to Clarity, and correct sharpening in digital workflows. Warren Stevens was a VERY smart man.
His hypothesis and procedures were correct of course.
We all did it (Point Source Photography) - mostly to please him.
The results were evident, especially if you followed his workflow (one needed to be meticulous and precise and there was the issue of dust and the subsequent hours of spotting - each print - sigh...)
BUT - we all coveted our Hasselblad negative, and (the becoming vintage) large format films.
After all, 35mm could not be serious enough! We missed the struggles of "real photography" even though this then new fangled thing required more intense "realness and seriousness".
This Professor was a veteran war photographer. He had photographed WWII carrying an 8 x 10 and
4 x 5 camera around. He knew the joys of large format, but knew its limitations and how it held photographic explorations hostage in many ways. Needless to say what it did to his body parts.
Warren (my professor) understood the need to romanticize, love of nostalgia, the exuberance of youth.
He understood that the grass is always greener.
And he truly understood that what goes around comes around. But things only come full circle when we are ready for it.
Using a 4 x5 is valid and important - but the same skill sets can be developed and honed with current technology.
This I believe!
And yes - we will do exercises in 4 x 5 when it is time later in the qtr:)
