I think it depends on what you photograph. Also on what you intend to do with the prints. Nothing stopping you from making contact prints until you get an enlarger.
I think it depends on what you photograph. Also on what you intend to do with the prints. Nothing stopping you from making contact prints until you get an enlarger.
As you can tell from the replies, there's no easy answer. Most people start with 4x5 and many are very happy staying in that format. I don't have a 4x5 enlarger so decided to shoot 8x10's and make contacts, but almost everyone with an 8x10 camera still has a 4x5 also. That makes it a great place to start, and maybe never move up. If money isn't an issue, I think the wisner and ebony camera's are the nicest on the market for wood field camera's.
If you are just starting out, you'll find a wealth of information here:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/
Particularly:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/matos-begin.html
Good luck, and welcome to the club.
Bruce Watson
Another digital possibility is, if you have the scanner and printer, create a larger negative on clear-based media, and then do contact prints of them. Dan Burkholder has a book out on doing that.
Gary,
One of the first challenges in LF is learning the camera and getting good negatives. I spent a year working on my development procedures and only doing contact prints until I could afford an enlarger (an Omega). 4x5 contacts are probably too small for most purposes but you can still get started and learn quite a bit without an enlarger.
Don
Paula Chamlee has made a lot of lovely 4x5 contact prints so it's something that can be done and that some people like. However, it depends a lot on the subject - Ansel Adams' photographs wouldn't be very well suited for 4x5 contact prints for example. It also depends on your personal tastes, some people (I'm one) just like small prints. The idea that the bigger a print is the better is a modern idea fueled in large part by marketing considerations(photographers and galleries can get a lot more for a 40x50 print than an 8x10 print)and also by the fact that digital has made it more feasible to make huge prints than it was with a traditional darkroom. Many of the old masters such as Steiglitz and Weston never made a print larger than 8x10 and their work has held up pretty well.
Having said all that, I think it's still fair to say that most people would find 4x5 prints too confining and too small for most subjects on a consistent basis but it's a good way to begin if you don't have a 4x5 enlarger (and these days people are virtually giving away 4x5 enlargers so buying one wouldn't break the bank).
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
Start off with 4x5. After that, you have 3 options, contact print, buy an enlarger, or go the digital route. You can make really nice 8x10 prints with a HP 7660 ($80 refurbished) and an old sacnner with a trannsparency adaptor (Acer, Eposn, orthers used, $50 eBay). I think that is the best start.
What size of final print do you like?
If you like 8x10 then you just as well get an 8x10 camera and a inexpensive lens and contact print those. (plenty of info about reasonably priced lenses for 8x10 on this site).
If you see yourself someday making larger prints, (11x14 and larger) then get the 4x5 camera and an enlarger. You are limited by the 8x10 negative for enlargement purposes.
5x7 is a nice compromise, mounted and matted a good 5x7 contact can have a lot of impact. You will be limited to contacts however unless you want to find an old 5x7 enlarger.
And of course there is the digital option already mentioned.
We do not know what your budget is and this usually plays about in the equation. Remember with the enalrger you will need a good lens, a place for the enlarger etc. Contact printing 8x10 you need the printing frame and light source which can be as simple as a tungsten bulb hanging over the frame. 8x10 you need a good sturdy tripod, 4x5 depending on the camera you can get by with a lesser tripod. There are a lot of variables. But if you are interested in contact printing 5x7 is the smallest I would go and 8x10 is ideal. That is untill you decide you want to go to 12x20!
I started LF with 4x5, a Super Graphic. I now use an 8x10 almost exclusively. I have a 5x7 back for it, but haven't yet exposed 5x7. I've become addicited to the 8x10 contact print. I would recommend thinking alot about what and how you want to photograph. There is a big difference in the portability of 4x5 and 8x10. I would also think about how much money you want to spend on materials. 8x10, the best way to do LF in my opinion, is expensive. Bought new (and fresh) 8x10 B&W film ranges from about $2.00 to $3.00 per sheet, or about what a 24-exposure roll of 35mm film cost. Of course, if we think too much much about the money we spend on making pictures, not many pictures would get made. However, I have found that the larger the film size, the fewer exposures I make. I think it has more to do with the time and effort required to set-up the larger cameras; becoming more selective about what I photograph; using one camera/film combination and being more confident about the result, than it does with film cost. If the on-going cost of film is not a problem for you, I'd say go straight to 8x10. Otherwise, I would recommend a 5x7 camera with 5x7 and 4x5 backs, rather than a 4x5 camera. Whatever you get, get a camera in good operating condition. There are generally more steps involved with using a LF camera, and you don't want to be fiddling with broken or malfunctioning parts when setting up and making adjustments.
In my not so humble opinion, 4x5 is where to start. Its going to be cheaper to setup, easier to find equipment, lighter to haul equipment, and most importantly cheaper to make mistakes on.
A 4x5 contact print may not have the same appeal as an 8x10 contact print, but then again, if you find something you like enough to enlarge, you can always find a local lab (or scan and print it).
Finally, if you decide you like LF enough to stick with it, but decide you want to move up to 5x7 or 8x10, you'll be able to take everything along with you. While your 4x5 lenses won't cover 8x10, you can always use a reducing back to just re-use your 4x5 equipment (sans camera, of course). If you buy lenses for 4x5 that cover 5x7, you won't even need to replace them if you move up.
So, yeah. By this point, I'm just repeating what others have already said, and said better. Consider this another vote to try out 4x5 to decide if this is the right move for you, then upsize as you think you'll need.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks