Sanity check, is 8x10 too small? Advanced GAS syndrom?

[Tim k]

For some time now, for no logical reason, I have been lusting after an 8x10.

Until a few weeks ago I really had no good reason for this lust. So now I'm thinking about trying out some alt. process contact printing. I'm really happy as a clam with my enlarged 4x5. But there is still this lust thing.

I do most of my print workup on 8x10 paper, and have never framed anything that small. If I get something I like I usually print on 11x14 paper and they look nice on the wall, but 16x20 looks better. You get the idea where I'm going.

So, all you guys that have been down the road, what do you think? Should I just get some point and shoot and some therapy?

Thx

[Scott Davis]

I'd say look into 6.5 x 8.5 (whole plate) as a reasonable compromise. It's ALMOST as big as an 8x10 image-wise, ALMOST as small as a 5x7 camera-wise. If you want to get into alt processes, working with ULF is an experience in itself - EVERYTHING takes on several orders of magnitude greater difficulty, AND cost. Lens availability for ULF is limited, and as you go up in size, becomes ever more limited. Film is somewhere between very and extremely expensive, and very limited in variety - Ilford and Efke are the two main suppliers. Anything from Ilford bigger than 11x14 must be purchased on a once-a-year basis from their special order run (there is a little bit of Kodak film drifting around out there in various ULF sizes, but they don't make it regularly).

I recently acquired a 14x17 - I love the camera, but taking it out shooting is an ordeal, and the logistics (not to mention the cost!) of shooting and printing negatives from it make handling an 8x10 seem like childs' play. Even my 11x14 feels small in comparison. If I were you, I'd try to go out with someone who has something bigger than 8x10 and try working with it. Working bigger than 8x10 is a joy, and a challenge. You've got to get a feel for if it's something you can commit to. If you have the chance, pop on over to the View Camera Store and see if Fred Newman has any ULF toys in the shop you can take for a spin.

[Dave Wooten]

5 x 7 enlargers pop up from time to time at give away prices. Enlarge some 5 x 7 negs to 16 x 20 plus and you just might be cured. If on the other hand you just have to have a large contact print then a larger format is in order. What Scott says is true about the ulf formats. You can t have the same mindset that you have on 4 x 5 or 8 x 10. All is relative. Go on a shooting session with an 11 x 14, 14 x 17 or 20 x 24 and do the prep and follow up work. 8 x 10 will not at all feel like a large camera.

I enlarge 4 x 5 and 5 x 7. I like contact prints from my 8 x 10 and 14 x 17. If I had an 8 x 10 enlarger, i would enlarge those also. All hunting is different one gun will not suffice.

[Richard M. Coda]

A year and a half ago I would have answered this question "no". That was before I got my 11x14". I love my 8x10 and it is my workhorse camera for B&W, but the more I use the 11x14, the more I want to go even bigger. The 4x5 has been relegated to mostly color these days.

[Dave Wooten]

A year and a half ago I would have answered this question "no". That was before I got my 11x14". I love my 8x10 and it is my workhorse camera for B&W, but the more I use the 11x14, the more I want to go even bigger. The 4x5 has been relegated to mostly color these days.

: !

[evan clarke]

So it goes, I am happy as a clam with 16x20 enlargements from 4x5 but since getting my nice light 11x14 things have changed a lot. My 8x10 is really tiny looking to me now and I have lust for a 16x20 camera...Evan Clarke

[Tim k]

Scott, thanks The View Camera Store is in Phoenix as I recall. Do they have a showroom where I could do that?

Dave, I am happy with my current enlarged prints from 4x5, I dont think 5x7 would be significantly different, and not solve the contact issue. You do make the 8x10 seem a little more attractive. And I would love to go out with someone with a big rig. Most of my friends are shooting lil electric jobs, and I'm the oddball.

Richard, thanks. Its like quicksand. Not very long ago I thought 4x5 was a big rig. You say your 8x10 is your workhorse. How do you do usually do your prints.

Thanks guys

[Tim k]

Evan, see 8x10, tiny looking??

[Richard M. Coda]

Richard, thanks. Its like quicksand. Not very long ago I thought 4x5 was a big rig. You say your 8x10 is your workhorse. How do you do usually do your prints.

Mostly contact prints, but I do have an 8x10 enlarger. Occasionally I will scan a neg to make a really large inkjet print.

[jp]

I too am happy with 16x20 prints from 4x5. I also have an 8x10 and contact printing and alt process stuff (Cyanotype, van dyke) is easy. I think it would be fun to have the option of bigger film, but it's not practical or portable enough. It's sort of a necessity to do contact printing as my options for 8x10 are contact print or scan. 4x5 is easy to enlarge, contact print, or scan.

I'm thinking a banquet camera would be pretty cool, but I'm not in the market for that unless I happened to be at a lawnsale or something, which isn't likely as I don't like to rise too early on saturday.

The next step for me is to get some pictorico clear film for my epson printer. I don't consider using the computer cheating. I'll scan some negatives in from 4x5 and 8x10, adjust the size, contrast, and density the way I want and print a negative for the contact printing frame. I'll need to make a bigger contact printing frame too.