A few observations....and ramblings
I've never used 8X10 but admire the portrait work I have seen in that format. Weight being an issue for me I settled on 4x5 as I like the aspect ratio. Since my camera came with a 5x7 back, I shot 5x7 although I had no initial interest in the format.
A lingering thought of one day possibly acquiring an intrepid to do 8x10 contacts....I want to try platinum prints also & 5x7 will work.
My favorite portraits are done in 6x7 & 4x5 formats. I like the way the look is rendered. I don't find my 35mm digital or film work as compelling.
The bigger cameras force you to work differently & result in different looking work which I like vs the smaller format.
Now that I have a 4x5 enlarger, it will be interesting to see how my prints will look.
(I have been using an epson V800 to scan my negatives).
On a side note my 5x7 epson scans are a huge jump in quality compared to the 4x5 scans. I was quite surprised.
Also my 6x7 negatives (8x10 prints) are sharper than from 4x5 negatives. I don't really mind, just an observation that initially surprised me.
Not sure if it is a lens issue, as I tend to use the same lens 95% of the time.
I have been intrigued by soft focus lenses for portraits & in the Kodak soft focus lens with that big number 5 shutter.
That big shutter needs a sturdy camera.
Soft focus lenses to my eye work better with an 8x10 negative. I like the look!
I recently visited a gallery and my eye was pulled by a great series of portraits.
It happened to be 8x10 camera work & printed on silver gelatin paper.
They were wonderful environmental portraits - something about the 8x10 - maybe it's the fact the lenses are longer but the images have a great look & more immediacy and pull you in - more personable I guess.
Hope everyone has a enjoyable day!
Glad winter is over & I can shoot outdoors more!
Hello Serge, you said it right. It's not (only) how big the negative is, there is more than that.
I do like the proportion of 4x5 / 8x10 (and 6x7), for portrait work it gives a sort of focusing point to the subject which I found it is not the case with 35mm (and 6x9); you can have very beautiful portrait with both (think about Steinmetz work which is mainly 6x9 - 35mm) but the photograph (the way we "read" it) will be different.
Big soft focus lens renders better on 8x10": I agree as well. I have a big Dogmar 5.5/360 (not a true SF lens but it is when used at FA) and I was amazed by the last portrait I made to my son on direct positive paper, there was like "magic" (allow me the word).
Then, I have shot many beautiful photographs on 4x5 that simply I couldn't do with 8x10" (mostly for lack of commitment, maybe).
Cheers
Pressing the shutter is the only easy thing
Ask Ansel.
Moon and Half Dome was taken with a Hasselblad. Cropped to portrait aspect.
Unless you intend to make contact prints in 8x10 from non-digital-negatives, I don't see much of a point to 8x10.
I prefer to make contacts up to 11X14
I will be making far larger contacts
this year
Tin Can
"Downgraded"? That sounds so judgmental!
I have shot both for years. Why limit yourself to one format? While many do, I just can't take my 8x10 rig outside, but the little Wista-made Zone VI goes into a shoulder bag that fits under the airplane seat or in the overhead.
Drew Bedo
www.quietlightphoto.com
http://www.artsyhome.com/author/drew-bedo
There are only three types of mounting flanges; too big, too small and wrong thread!
I'll have to downgrade someday when the 8x10 finally gets too heavy, or else the film gets too darn expensive. In the meantime, I'll happily remain a format schizophrenic : MF last week, 8x10 in the pack for tomorrow, maybe 4x5 next week, even 35mm once in awhile.
gfeuct - gotta take exception to your remark. Put one of those cropped Hassie 16X20 prints in the same portfolio as optimized modern enlargements from 8x10 film printed the same size, and oh my, something just won't look right! And I'm very familiar with the actual AA print you're talking about, not just its reproductions. It's famous, of course, but barely holds up even to 16X20 scale. Different era. Most of his 8X10 images didn't fare so well larger than 20X24 print size. But relative to my own standards and full modern fillm and lenses, I would personally never print anything 645 (essentially 6X6 cropped) any larger than 11X14.
I do print a lot of 6X7 and 6X9 negs, color ones up to 20X24. They look great unless they're side by side with ones printed the same size from LF negs. Right now, in my fresh darkroom stack, I've got some of each, and the distinction is obvious. An 8X10 enlarged to 20X24 (only 2.5X) using a graphics apo lens has almost a micro-etched contact print look, maybe better. What's 645 at 2.5X? - smaller than a 5X7 postcard.
Yes, that makes sense. I've been thinking about what I would want to shoot 8x10. I did a small project recently (on 4x5) as a "test."
11x14 would be so fun to try but my wallet protests!
Was it the size and weight that turned you off?
Sounds interesting!
5x7 seems like the "Goldilocks." I'm really tempted to try it. The entry cost keeps me out.
I couldn't think of a more fitting word than "downgrade" the time. "Down-size" would have been perfect.
Heavy camera but beautiful!
I just couldn't think of the word "down-size" at the time. No harm meant. We agree.
Sometimes when I'm out shooting 4x5 in the city dozens of people will see what I'm going for, pull out their phone, get the shot way before me, walk off, and look super pleased. It's really funny.
TLR's are so easy to travel with. Boxes fit anywhere, they offend no-one, they're light, the image quality rocks. I'm super tempted to try 5x7. Enjoy your trip(s)! Japan is on my list.
I would love to try 11x14 but I can't justify the expense. 11x14 contacts must look sooooooooo good.
Lol, keep us posted .
4x5 really is small if you compare a contact to the effort. I wouldn't be able to shoot 8x10 regularly either.
Nice comment. Maybe it's harder for you to focus on the 4x5 ground glass than the 8x10 or 6x7? Who was the photographer behind the prints you liked?
8x10 is just so big that hauling it out has to be a song and dance. 4x5 still takes a lot of commitment. I just got back from a shoot and my back is still feeling it. I had to carry the camera around in a bag for a few hours. The weight piles up fast.
Yes, I'll be going for contacts and big slides if I ever try 8x10.
Link us when you do!
Yes, I couldn't think of a better word (like "downsize") at the time. My main limits are weight and budget. I'd still like to expose a few 8x10 frames some day though. Maybe a workshop is the best bet.
You must have a killer darkroom setup! I'd love to see 8x10 enlarged to 20x24 in person.
My Website: CertainExposures.com
Just u wait
I am expecting Friday the biggest and heaviest 8x10 ever made
Tin Can
Even Clyde Butcher had to downsize. Even went to digital.
https://clydebutcher.com/about-the-a...l-information/
Flickr Home Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums
Bookmarks