4x5 or 8x10 for potrait project ?

[dbr]

Hello everyone, I am about to undertake a large portrait series (about 75-80 total)
in color. I have shot in 4x5 for the last 12 years or so but it has been well over 20 years since I used an 8x10 and I have never scanned an 8 x 10 color neg.

One of my objectives is to have the option of printing the portraits at a large size,
say as large as 48"x 60" @ 300dpi

Aesthetic considerations aside, given that the single largest expense is in high res.drum scans for this size output,
is there any advantage to using 8x10 ( 6x enlargements vs. 24x enlargements) ?

My brain (whats's left of it) always turns to mush where dpi is concerned.

I would also welcome opinions on (obtainable) portrait lenses for 8x10.

I've probably opened a can of worms here but I know enough to ask when I don't know.

Thanks

[BradS]

Neither.

I think 5x7 is the way to go for portraits. It just fits the human body shape better.

[Ken Lee]

Ignoring cost, a good lens for 4x5 and 8x10 will be close in terms of resolution. So other factors aside, your 8x10 images will be close to twice as sharp, and close to 1/2 as grainy, since they will require 1/2 the enlargement.

From 4x5 inches to 4x5 feet, is a 12x enlargement, not 24x. (Perhaps you are thinking about area).

You need a lens 2X the size for 8x10, and you get 1/4 the depth of field (IE 2 stops less) given the same basic image. Since color film tends to be slower than b&w, will you have enough light to stop the lens down commensurately ? Or don't you care about depth of field ?

Some people consider a full-body shot to be a portrait. Others mean a close head-shot. Which length lens would you use on a 4x5 camera ?

[Frank Petronio]

If you can afford to do it, then go for it, they will be just that much better. It's not only the resolution of the scan that matters, but the depth and presence, which are enhanced the larger you go.

The aperture you shoot at has more effect than the type of lens almost, I think. Short depth of field or tack sharp? Torsos or faces or environmental portraits?

Avedon used a modern 360 at f/16 on 8x10 for his West series. I thought those were swell.

[Walter Calahan]

"I thought those were swell."

Swell indeed. Grin.

Don't think dpi, think ppi.

****

Don't worry about getting the right lens or format, simply make sure your gear doesn't get in the way of your vision. Lately I've had fun making portraits of my students using an Olympus half-frame camera. Haven't got my 5x7 Graflex up to speed yet to make all the bode shapes fit better. Someday. Need to find really little screws.

[BarryS]

...

Avedon used a modern 360 at f/16 on 8x10 for his West series. I thought those were swell.

I remember going to see the "In The American West" exhibition in the 80's and it was like a grenade thrown into an art museum. This was before the gigantism that's permeated contemporary photography, and the effect was electric. One of the best exhibitions I've ever seen. As to whether dbr should use 4x5 or 8x10, I'd do some test shots in both formats before deciding.

[Bruce Watson]

One of my objectives is to have the option of printing the portraits at a large size, say as large as 48"x 60" @ 300dpi.

Let's see. That's (48 in)(300 ppi)(60 in)(300 ppi)(2 bytes/channel)(3 channels) = 1.5 GB. This is doable. It'll require a big honking PC / Mac, but Photoshop can handle files this big given enough hardware. Just don't expect it to be quick.

Aesthetic considerations aside, given that the single largest expense is in high res.drum scans for this size output, is there any advantage to using 8x10 ( 6x enlargements vs. 24x enlargements)?

To start with, that's only a 12x enlargement for 5x4. You can use 5x4 for this work depending on the film you choose and how the prints get displayed. If you are going to encourage people to walk right up to the prints then you might be more happy with 7x5 or 10x8 as there's less chance of any graininess and tonal gradations will be somewhat better.

I'm a drum scanner operator. I've got to say that the state of the art of scanning today is such that you might not want to use a drum scanner. A 6x enlargement can be handled just as well on a professional flatbed. You might want to talk to our own Ted Harris about this. I suspect he'll chime in. Ted, where are you... ;-)

[enochRoot]

Avedon used a modern 360 at f/16 on 8x10 for his West series. I thought those were swell.

were you able to see the actual prints? that show came through our local museum last year, and it was one of the few times i was happy to be living in columbus! it was probably one of the most moving gallery shows (photography or otherwise) that i have ever seen. just amazing!

edit: hadn't read barry's post yet:

I remember going to see the "In The American West" exhibition in the 80's and it was like a grenade thrown into an art museum. This was before the gigantism that's permeated contemporary photography, and the effect was electric. One of the best exhibitions I've ever seen.

couldn't have said it better myself!

[John O'Connell]

I would also welcome opinions on (obtainable) portrait lenses for 8x10.

If you want a modern lens, just about every portrait length for 8x10 is easily obtainable. You can get very good deals on the standard plasmats (Sironars, Symmars, Nikkor-Ws, Fuji CMWs) in the longer lengths, 360mm and 480mm. They weigh a ton and you'd need a stable camera, but they'd probably be a first best choice for color work. If you want something lighter, a 450mm Nikkor M, a Ronar, or an Artar would be worth a look. There’s also a Fujinon Tessar, a 420mm L-series that might work.

Anything longer than 480mm in 8x10 creates diminishing returns when doing portraits. A 600mm lens requires about 36" of bellows to do a head and shoulders composition. You can switch to a telephoto, but you’re into a range where you have to factor in the pupillary magnification and they’re not designed for macro work.

I’ve done a decent amount of 8x10 portrait work, and I’ve mostly used a 355 G-Claron and a 210 Sironar-N (now sold). If I were starting a long series of portraits in color, I’d probably pick up a 240mm Sironar-S for full-length or environmental shots and use the G-Claron for everything else.

[Frank Petronio]

There is a book out of how Avedon did the West series (Google it). It has photos of his set-ups and basic info, plus there is stuff from his former assistants circulating the web. Basically he used heavy duty, first class gear.