Any benefit to 8x10 over 4x5 if not contact printing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welly

Ok, I'm pretty much sold. It's lucky I don't have a wife I suppose.

---

There you go! An 8x10 major chick-magnet...with room for two under the darkcloth! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vaughn

There you go! An 8x10 major chick-magnet... :D

---

Absolutely. I love the looks I get when I tell them I have a 9 1/2" Dagor.

I have a 12 inch Ektar. They tend to wince when I mention that.

... and when in Europe, I mention my 300mm... but they seem less impressed. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrianShaw

I have a 12 inch Ektar. They tend to wince when I mention that.

---

I have 12" and 14" Dagors, plus a 16 1/2" Artar. But I'm basically a modest person.

But seriously... in the absense of a desire to contact print I look at 8x10 as an opportinity to have to live with more constrained film options than 4x5. Mybe I need further education... who knows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh

I have 12" and 14" Dagors, plus a 16 1/2" Artar. But I'm basically a modest person.

---

I'm out. No sense trying to compete with that. I was just about to brag on my size 12 shoes, but thought better of it.

p.s. to the anonymous PMer... leave belt size out of the discussion. Belt size is correllated with appetite more than anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrianShaw

But seriously... in the absense of a desire to contact print I look at 8x10 as an apportinity to have to live with more constrained film options than 4x5. Mybe I need further education... who knows.

---

Learning to use an 8x10 is a bit like learning to target shoot with a flintlock. It will improve your technique tremendously, and everything else will be easy in comparison. The only film you need is Tri-X.

Here's a moderately hi-res scan from 8x10" I posted a few years ago, with four sizes to choose from, and the largest doesn't really come close to showing the full resolution of the neg, or the maximum resolution possible with an 8x10" camera. The camera is an ultralight 8x10" Gowland and the lens was probably a 12" Gold Dot Dagor and the scanner was an Agfa Duoscan--nothing really modern or state of the art for when I made the photo (2004). It's just what you get without working too hard.--

http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo/imviaduct.htm