Why do you shoot 8x10?

[Noah B]

A few months ago I sold off all of my film cameras and focused on digital for half a year. I was finding out that my results weren't coming out like I wanted and knew I always wanted to work with an 8x10. One day I bought all of the chemicals and went back to work with the darkroom. To this day I still question why I moved up to the 8x10. Part of me knows that I made the move so I could take myself in a more serious manner and encroach upon a new level of commitment to my own work I had never reached before. Sometimes I think about selling off my gear and buying a 4x5 but the screen was too small :P So I challenge you fellow 8x10 shooters, why do you work with this camera?

[Michael Wynd]

It suits me. Plus it weighs so damn much that I really have to think if a shot is worth the time and effort of taking the backpack off and getting the beast set up, take the shot and then pack it away and put the backpack back on. I've been pretty happy with the shots I've taken since I started using 8x10 and this is the reason why for me.
Mike

[Peter Galea]

Composing on the screen is like looking through a bay window.
The negative quality is beyond compare.

[William Whitaker]

There are several reasons I use 8x10, some more rational than others. The biggest reason for me is that the lenses for 8x10 fall into a range where the depth of field characteristics are most pleasing to my eye. With smaller formats, quite often there is more in focus than I want. With larger formats, depth of field is too shallow. 8x10 is at an optically sweet spot. Of course, there are always exceptions depending on the subject matter. But generally speaking I find it at a nice balance point for the way that I see the world.

[DJG]

I don't have a real darkroom, so I'm pretty much limited to contact prints. 4x5 was too small, so that's why I jumped to 8x10! Now, I'm looking at going bigger, either with a ULF camera, or going the route of digital negatives. I really like printing, even though I still have a ton to learn.

[Dennis]

It is large enough to contact print. Though to me still a bit smallish. The great equalizer in print quality is the enlarger. If you are going to put your film in an enlarger and make moderate enlargements you lose a lot of the value of the larger neg. I can make 11x14 enlargements from 120 film that are right there in optical quality with the same enlargement from a 4x5 neg. The only reasons to use 4x5 vs 120 are the perspective and focus adjustments and the contemplative nature of looking at an upside down image with your head under a cloth.
So it depends on the end result you are after. A 4x5 is too small for contact prints IMO and an 8x10 is just barely large enough.
If you are using a scanner in your process then my experience/opinion is not relevant.
Dennis

[John Kasaian]

It's fun.
I enjoy working with film and graded paper and making big beautiful contact prints and the gear is ever so funky---spartan yet at the same time cumbersome---shooting 8x10is a little like working out at a gym which has an ISO rating.
Nearly everything about setting up a shot is intuitive---the only "instructions" are what I feel like I should be doing. No instruction manual came with my 'dorff.
Sometimes I get to meet nice people who are attracted by or curious about my camera, and when they ask if it's a Hasselblad, well that nearly always always makes me smile.
Its not just a camera, nor is it just about the print, but rather the whole physical experience from loading the holders, to the logistics of shooting, to seeing an image magically appear in the tray.
Its sort of like a combo plate at Tomasita's in Santa Fe or the Whoa Nellie Deli in Lee Vining.
And I never, ever have to worry about batteries.

[Gem Singer]

IMHO, the 8x10 negative is the ideal size for making contact prints large enough for viewing.

8x10 B&W film is easy to obtain and relatively inexpensive. Also, an 8x10 negative is the largest size that I can use with my scanner.

Gave up the 8x10 format when I was no longer comfortable carrying a heavy camera outfit. Especially with several 8x10 film holders.

The largest format I now use is 5x7. Seems to be more practical. Comfortable to carry, scans very easily on my Epson V750 scanner, and makes nice 16x20 B&W prints on my Epson 3880 printer.

For color, either a DSLR or a MF roll film camera is the better choice when it comes to film availability, cost, and ease of processing.

[Brian Ellis]

I don't at the moment but have in the past and will again some day. I liked it because it was such a pleasure to compose on the 8x10 ground glass. I also liked the size of the camera and holders. They obviously were harder to carry around but they made me feel like a real old-time photographer. Today it's my back that makes me feel that way.

[Leigh]

To prove that I have no sense whatsoever.

I have all formats here, from half-frame 35mm through 8x10. I use the 8x10 when I want to do serious work, something that (in my mind at least) constitutes "art" in a photographic sense, as opposed to documentary or advertising work.

Like most here, I only shoot b&w in LF. The smaller formats are mostly color.

- Leigh