Why not a 4x5 holder as big as an 8x10?

[Ben Syverson]

I was shooting a little 8x10 today, and had a thought... Wouldn't it be cool to have a 4x5 film holder that was the same size as an 8x10 double dark?

That way, you wouldn't need to have a 4x5 reducing back to shoot 4x5 on your 8x10. And you could switch between 4x5 and 8x10 as quickly as you could swap film holders.

Does such a thing exist? If not, I guess I could glue some 4x5 guides in the middle of a 8x10 double dark and see what happens.

[Jim Graves]

Nice idea ... one issue would be adding something at the "open" end of the 4x5 guides so the film could not slide out of position after it was loaded.

[Frank Petronio]

Just tape a pc of film in the center of a regular 8x10 holder.

Go one further like one semi-famous guy who took a roll of 35mm film and cut it up into strips and taped it into an 8x10 holder for a very disjointed but cool image.

[Vaughn]

I got some of those...one-sided, with a pressure plate on one side and glass on the other -- you can load any size film (8x10 or smaller) that you want to.

Trouble is, a reducing back and a whole mess of 4x5 holders would take up less space and weigh less than an 8x10 back and a few of converted 8x10 holders.

Another thing one could do is just have 8x10 film/holders and use those cropping boards inside the camera to make 4 4x5 shots on a piece of 8x10 film.

Vaughn

[vinny]

here's another idea:
http://www.toho-machine.co.jp/Reducing.htm

[John Schneider]

I made one of these in 4x10 for the occasional shot on an 8x10 camera. Problem is that this approach quickly becomes heavier and bulkier than a 4x10 reducing back and dedicated 4x10 holders.

But the reducing back costs $$$ and you still have the bulk of an 8x10 camera. IMO, unless you like to tinker and make over-engineered stuff (and I'm guily of that as well), I'd just (as Vaughn suggested supra) make two splitter darkslides and make four 4x5 exposures on an 8x10 sheet. The biggest drawback to that method is that you can't separately develop each exposure.

[Ole Tjugen]

Plate holders used to come with a whole set of reducing inserts for use with smaller plates. As an example my 24x30cm (9.5x12") camera came with inserts for 18x24, 13x18, 10x15, 9x12 and 6.5x9cm.

[Archphoto]

Why go though all the bulk if you can do it with your enlarger anyway ???
Shooting 4x5 with a 8x10 ?
I have a 4x5 rear frame on my Sinar P2, it is on the camera most of the time.
The conversion takes a couple of minutes.....

Peter

[Walter Calahan]

Crop!

[Arthur Nichols]

I modified some 8x10 holders into 5x8 and 4x10 by using blank exposed and fixed film as fillers. For the 4x10 I made two strips of 2x10 and two strips of 1 7/8. First I attached the smaller strip with double sided tape to the holder and then attached the slightly wider one on top. I did this for both the top and and the bottom of the holder. By doing this I ended up with a 4x10 slot in the center of the holder with two small lips on the 10' dimension that I slip the film under. It worked resaonably well. I made two holders like this and the second one held the film a litte more secure than the first one.
I also made a 5x8 holder in the same way but added fillers to take up the unused space at the ends. I made a flap at the end that is used for loading.
I would prefer dedicated holders and reducing backs but for the money these are a resonable substitue. One advantage to the modified holders is that the focal plane stays in exactly the same plane and you don't have to check focus when you change formats.
Art