Printing 8x10

[Chad Jarvis]

I guess I'm speaking from the point of view of not having a 7 foot tall enlarger in my bathroom.

Besides, the question posed, Tim, stated that an "8x10 enlarger is probably out of the question." In my pragmatic approach, carrying a 4x5 and enlarging seems to make sense for Mike. I still say one should contact print (preferably in something other than silver) if one is going to lug around an 8x10.

Enlarging is only one option.

[tim atherton]

"I still say one should contact print (preferably in something other than silver) if one is going to lug around an 8x10. "

an unneccessarily restrictive approach

"Enlarging is only one option".

scanning and printing is another

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I can easily see the difference between 4x5 and 8x10 in a 20x24 enlargment and most certainly see it in a 40x50 enlargement.



Yeah well, big is not always better......and digital prints big or small are no where near a contact print.

[tim atherton]

"I can easily see the difference between 4x5 and 8x10 in a 20x24 enlargment and most certainly see it in a 40x50 enlargement.

Yeah well, big is not always better......and digital prints big or small are no where near a contact print."

You only ever seem to think small is better Jorge and that contact prints are the bees knees and nothing can ever compare with them so there's really not much point is there?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Tthis thread was about 8x10 and enlarging 8x10 negatives with an enlarger.

Using your same argument you always seem to think that big digital prints are the bees knees and nothing can compare to them if your statements:

why limit yourself to contact prints?



an unneccessarily restrictive approach



are anything to go by.



Did you answer Mike's question? Nope, but you could not resist telling him and Chad to make big digital prints. I am sure they have thought of this option, but Mike's question and Chad comment had nothing to do with digital prints, why cant you leave it alone and let those who want a different approach use it?

[tim atherton]

Jorge

the question was "For all of you 8x10 camera users out there, do you contact print or enlarge?"

and the point made that an 8x10 enlarger was out of the question.

The Digital Taliban approach seems to be "don't mention digital unless its asked for" My approach is - it's an option that can be considered but perhaps might not have been.

Contact print or Enlarger only is merely a Hobsons choice with artificially imposed limitations. There are other options that were not in any way excludied in the initial question.

But go ahead with your quest for censorship if you wish

[Nick Morris]

Hello. I moved through the formats to 8x10. When I got to 4x5, I shot in 3 formats, 35mm, 120, and 4x5 - and enlarged. Since I went to 8x10, it is now the only format I use (except for family-event snaps). I contact print, and it is the contact print that makes the difference. Otherwise, I would use 4x5, or possibly a 5x7 with 5x7 and 4x5 backs. None of my equipment is state-of-the-art. 11x14 would be nice, but costs are an issue for me. There is something to be said for limiting your equipment choices, and for me, 8x10 B&W silver contact prints are a satisfactory medium.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Apparently the one who wants to censor is yourself. I expressed my opinion about contact prints and digital prints, and it seemed to have bothered you. I am sure if Mike wanted to know about digital prints he would have included "do you enlarge, contact print or scan and digitally print".....As I said, and you seemed to gloss over very quickly, I am sure he has thought of the option of scanning and making digital prints.

Yeah and the digital Intefada seems to be lets all do digital and make big prints.....Recently QT asked about correcting vignetting with PS, did you read any of us saying, "well I dont know about PS but you can certainly do it with masks in a DR"....no right? It was not appropriate and it was not what QT was asking, in the same vein it would be nice if you had the same courtesy, it is not about censorship, it is about courtesy and keeping the thread on topic, which BTW this is shot to hell too....

BTW Mike, I contact print and once in a while I would like to enlarge, but the ocassion is rare since I dont do silver printing any more and of course the big 12x2o negs fullfill that desire..
I am lucky that I have a ZOne VI enlarger wich I could fit with an 8x10 head, but so far I have not have the need to do that. If you plan on enlarging you could get the bst of both worlds and get a 5x7. It is big enough to make very nice contact prints and at the same time enlargers like the Zone VI will let you enlarge with little difference from an 8x10 negative. The problem is that there is not as much a selection of film in this format. As you say, desicions, desicions..

[MIke Sherck]

I never intended to restart the digital vs. traditional print discussion and I apologize if my original message was incomplete and unclear. I'm a computer programmer and I sit in front of a monitor all day. The last thing I want to do when I'm not working is... sit in front of a monitor. So I've made a deliberate decision for reasons which seem reasonable to me that my photography is not going to include digital technology, either in capture or in printing. It's not a "better" or "worse" situation, it's just the way I perceive "fun".

I was (and am,) curious as to how many 8x10 photographers eventually found that they wished they could print larger than 8x10. In retrospect it was probably a stupid question: Edward Weston did little other than contact printing (enlarging some of his commercial portraits to 8x10 film and then contact printing the dups,) while his contemporary Ansel Adams, from what I can tell, enlarged practically everything. It's a very unique decision, I believe, and after reflection I think that surveying others' experiences isn't likely to help me decide what my own personal esthetic is likely to be a year or two down the road.

It is interesting, though, to listen to others' thoughts on the subject. Sometimes the process of making a decision is more fun than actually having made it! I do feel enlightened by your comments and appreciate everyone who wrote. I'll keep your experiences in mind while I wrestle over this. Thanks!

[Mark_3632]

It is a tough decision. A nice contact print is something to behold, but sometimes an image wants to go bigger. Since we can't all have 12x20 cameras enlarging is the only choice. My wallet makes my photographic decisions for me. I may "want" the 12x20 or the big enlarger but the wallet keeps me in check.

I do not shoot 8x10. When the time came to make a choice, I chose 5x7 because I wanted to enlarge in the future. Now I really have no desire to look into an enlarger, a 5x7 contact is just fine with me. Lately there has been a growing lust for a 7x17 or 8x20 though. God this is an addictive hobby.