Another 8x10 portrait from my First Twenty page.

[Henry Ambrose]

I've been pretty busy with not a lot of time to work with my 8x10. The C1 is sold to a new home, and my Masterview is tuned up and working great - I really like this camera. A good deal on a used 7600 Epson printer opened the door to big prints whenever I want one. I'm having fun.


Here's the latest installment.

[Donald Brewster]

Looks like the subjects are having fun too. Nicely done.

[Ralph Barker]

Looks like a fun project, Henry. Keep it up.

[Frank Petronio]

The Heidi photo is excellent

[robc]

Nicely done.

the image one from last reminded me of another shot in the exact same mould. Somewhat different subject but almost identical idea and crop.

you can see it at the following link. Goto africa link and first thumbnail

close up eye

[adrian tyler]

tell you what though henry, your colour architecture work is excellent, unlike most stuff i see in which i can only recognise references to other photographers, your architecture portfolio speaks of you... thanks

[Henry Ambrose]

Thanks guys!

Anyone else have portraits to show?

[Ken Lee]

I can't tell if you are asking only for 8x10 portraits.



If not, here's one made with a 5X7 Eastman Kodak View No 2A.

[John Flavell]

Henry, the detail phots really show the "details" How are you scanning on the 4990? Right on the glass? Wet mounting?

[Henry Ambrose]

John,
I'm scanning with the film directly on the glass. You might want to test your scanner as some individual units may focus at varying heights. Most often I tape down the corners but not always if the particular film seems to lie perfectly flat.

The thing that makes this simple method perform so well is the size of the negative. When enlarging only 2-3X the prints are just gonna look really good. Viewing these scans on screen, at the plane of exact focus, every pore, hair and blemish is sharply visible. And the exact plane of focus is clearly visible as the subject falls in and out. The horsepower of the big negative simply overcomes the technical imperfection of the scanner and this at 1200 pixel per inch scanning resolution. Obviously this might not apply if the goal was wall size murals, but a 3x enlargement from 8x10 is 24x30 which is pretty darn big. And its all at a "no sweat" understressed level thats comfortable to work with - not like trying to pull big prints from 35mm.

That said, I've recently made some 5-6x enlargment factor prints from 4x5 that look really nice. I've also compared a 4000 pixel drum scan of 6x7 film against the same film scanned on the 4990. The drum scan shows sharply resolved grain that's not visible in the flatbed scans and look lots better on screen. A 13 inch wide print from the Epson and a 22 inch wide print from the drum have very similar qualities in terms of fine detail and "satisfaction of viewing". This might be oversimplifying things a bit but I'd say for certain images you really can make 5-6x prints from 4990 scans.