What about me?Originally Posted by JMB
What about me?
What you write about digital negatives from 6X7 cm, and 6X9 cm, and 6X12 cm, and 5X7" is true.wowee!!!!
and I thought that 8x10 was big enough.
JMB(OP), are you completely against scanning and outputting digital negatives? The cost of film holders, the camera, and a lens to cover 20x24 will get you a GREAT 8x10 camera, a great flatbed scanner(maybe even a drum scanner w/ the trimmings), multiple lenses, and a boxload of film holders, plus film.
just sayin....
sandy king(he's on here) makes large digital negs, and IIRC, he uses a 6x7cm camera for a lot of his work, using fine-grained film such as Acros and Tmax100
might try asking him.
but I'm not stopping you going with a straight analog process
-Dan
But I also have a 20X24" camera and have made quite a number of prints with it, mostly palladium, some kallitypes, and a few carbons. One of them is reproduced in Dick Arentz' 2nd edition of pt/pd printing, and I have the original print hanging in my home. It is pretty darn spectacular in real life if I say so myself.
20X24" is pretty insane but being half crazy already I never let that bother me. Problem is I have grown so used to the extreme control with digital negatives that I have printed very few of the large 20X24" negatives I have made over the past several years. But it is pretty hard to find a scanner that will do 20X24. Course, I see this guy in Atlanta who has a large Screen drum scanner that will do up to 20X24 and I sure am tempted!!! But maybe not even I am that crazy. On the other hand . . .
Really no point in posting images becuse on a computer monitor you won't see any difference from a 12 mp digital point and shoot. Sorry, but that is the way it is.
Sandy
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
Daniel,
I am trying hard not to be completely against the idea of working with digitally enlarged negatives. And I would like to think that it is possible for me to hear dissenting voices of reason even though I am very much in love with silver contact prints. Your recommendation re Sandy King in light of his experiences with digital negatives is definitely of interest because I believe I saw an old post somewhere that he is or was also a proud owner of a 20 x 24 camera. Are you out there Mr. King?
Hugo Zhang writes that Tri Tran has done some marvelous work with his 20x24, so there is apparently no looking back for Tri, at least. So this is definitely the kind of input that I am after. Thanks for taking the time to offer some advice. I appreciate it.
Sorry to always be the village idiot but...can someone tell me, in one sentence, what a "digitally enlarged negative" is?
thanx,
Joe
Joe,
Well, you scan the original negative, then apply tonal corrections in Photoshop, and then output a negative on an inkjet printer using a clear transparency, or perhaps you send the file off to have an LTV negative printed on continuous tone film. Then you use the digital negative to make a contact print with whatever process you use.
The advantage of printing with digital negatives is that you can make all of the corrections in Photoshop so you have almost an infinite amount of control over the image.
Sorry, off to bed now because I am having a minor surgical procedure tomorrow and need to get some rest.
Sandy
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
[QUOTE=JMB;665853]Hugo and Jim,
Thank you for the recommendations re: Trin. I am in China at the moment, but I am likely to be in Los Angeles in February. I would very much like to see Trin's work. Can we meet-up at some point?
It would be nice to get together maybe somewhere in the OC area. Tri's work needs to be seen if you are interested is seeing different types of 20x24 prints. By February I hope to have my 14x17 camera up and running. Hopefully going to finish everything but the bellows this week. Maybe I'll have a 14x17 carbon print or two to show.
Jim
Huh. Wow. thanx Sandy. Facinating.
Hey Pawlowski,
I am overrun by the posts. Your post came while I was replying to another. Thanks for the post and the Ebay recommendation. If I make a purchase, I hope to do it through the forum, however.
William, IC-Racer, and MDM,
Generally, I am very interested in the impact of image size relative to viewing space. And I am quite convinced that certain images gain huge impact at large sizes. Hence, when I begin making direct enlargements from 8x10 negatives, I hope to make enlargements substantially larger than even 20 x 24 that would not be feasible by contact print.
Still, I am also very much in love with contact prints, and I have always felt that the impact of some images [definitely not all] could be increased if they were larger [and of course larger without losing the natural characteristics of contact prints]. Hence, my interest in the 20 x 24 camera.
Your point, I think, is that a good enlargement to 20 x 24 from an 8x10 negative [only about 2x larger] may nevertheless still be indistinguishable from a 20 x 24 contact print. Now, that's something to think about, at least within the world of silver printing. I guess if your view is right, then the 20 x 24 would only create some advantages for carbon, platinum, or other types of contact printing. And a much larger camera would be required to realize and demonstrate unique, distinguishable contact print quality in very large scale photographs.
I will have to compare some 8x10 enlargements to 20 x 24 contact prints and reach some conclusions. Thank you!
And I suppose that I am really after a way to make the biggest it seems to me that I am thinking that when I begin enlarging 8x10 negatives directly as prints that I will attempt to go very large.
Sorry folks. Please disregard the last two lines of my last message. It's a decomposed, cannibalized sentence that I did not erase. Thanks to all of you for your sound advise and helpfullness.
I think Richard Ritter has a 20x24 in process. It's not a trivial undertaking. I am also not sure what the pricing is, but I believe it is close to the Busch on e***, for a new camera, supported, adjusted, and in the future, repaired (if needed).
Richard has made a couple, at least, to my knowledge. Prof. King has one (good luck with the medical stuff, sir). Another that went to Sweden had a nine foot bellows extension (yup, nine feet). We made a special "Video Owner's Manual" for it in my basement.
It also weighs about 30 pounds, plus lens and tripod, and at 30 pounds, it needs a much smaller tripod. The e*** seller says the Busch weighs about 100.
Just for kicks, you might want to talk to Richard and get details. I urge a phone call. Even I have trouble getting Richard to respond to emails sometimes.
I think he also has an 11x14 "in inventory" from a canceled order. With holders. We almost used it in our 8x10 Tire Kicker Workshop.
Bruce Barlow
author of "Finely Focused" and "Exercises in Photographic Composition"
www.brucewbarlow.com
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks