Film size and long-exposures.

[FStopFitzgerald]

Hi LF photography,

I've a question I'm hoping those of you with more experience can help with. I shoot long exposures of the ocean with Acros on 120 but have been considering replacing my 2x3 Century Graphic with a 4x5 to take advantage of the larger negative. I'm familiar with 4x5 but have never taken the time to do long exposures in b&w on that size.

I've been pondering however if the larger negative size will make as big a difference as in a normal shot given that much of my work is just blurred soft water. I could see it going either way when I think of it though, 4x5 long exposures seem like they would have a greater tonality at the least to the water. Can anyone with experience share their knowledge?

[ic-racer]

Assuming magnification is about the same, for the same print size, your aperture on the 4x5 will be smaller to get the same DOF. The resultant longer exposure (by about 2x) may blur the water more if you want this.

[FStopFitzgerald]

Good point! Let's assume I drop down the number of stops on my ND to equate the exposure time and depth of field between formats. I'm gonna have to just cave and get a 4x5 again to answer the question I think.

[Doremus Scudder]

In my experience, highlight areas like clouds, white water, etc. have a tendency to show grain more than other areas. Moving to a larger negative will certainly reduce apparent grain, especially if you are making larger prints.

Doremus