Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 57

Thread: LF for large digital reproduction?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    22

    LF for large digital reproduction?

    Gday all

    I'm a commercial 35mm shooter and when i shoot landscapes I stitch to get resolution for prints which are usually about 60" wide. Stitching is obviously very limited, and about a year ago I came close to taking the LF plunge, but funds and other things conspired against me, but I'd like to take another crack. Due to aforementioned $ issues a Shen Hao of some sort has always been my first choice, but I'm not sure of the exact format. Film will be scanned on an EpsonV700 and printed with an Epson 9800, both of which i do personally. The thing is I'm not sure if 5x7 will be enough for 60" reproductions given I cant drop a bundle on a lens, but yet as I understand it the 5x7 bracket is where you get the most bang for your buck. I dont know enough about this to make a decision, hoping LFPF can help!

    I was tempted to drop $1600 on this Shen-Hao w/ 240 + extras but that is absolutely maxing out my budget . . but that auction has pretty much everything you need. Jeez, things are so much simpler in small format . . ha

    Cheers all, Tom

  2. #2
    Daniel Stone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Posts
    2,157

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    1stly, welcome!

    Are you shooting b/w, color, or a mixture of the both?

    Use the later-designed APO-designated lenses. They deliver stellar results, and it shows at big enlargements.

    Forget the Epson if you want quality(tonality and pure fine detailed) results. Get DRUM SCANS. You'll shit your pants when you see the fine details brought out of your film when you compare it to the mush your Epson will deliver at higher "resolutions"... Seriously... Get some Depends, cause its scary how good a quality drum scan is...Use the search function here to find the threads talking about different labs/persons who might be the right fit for you.

    If you're doing panoramic stitches, why not just go with a dedicated panoramic camera in the first place? Look at Peter Lik(and many other people), and you can see they can make it happen. Its just how "wide" do you want to go perspective-wise?

    sorry to be so blunt, but I hate beating around the bush with sentimental "cooing and blabbering"

    cheers, and welcome to the forum!

    Dan

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    103

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    You can get a lot more for your $$$ in 4x5" and you can get a huge scan from it! 60" scan? Not quite sure, but I've easily done 36" print scans from it. I bet you could push it to 60" with minimal loss. With that being said, I've seen some good 5x7" deals, just because it's not as popular of a format. I went to one studio closing and they could barely give the 5x7 stuff away!

  4. #4
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    5,614

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    Quote Originally Posted by jim steines View Post
    ...Film will be scanned on an EpsonV700 and printed with an Epson 9800, both of which i do personally. The thing is I'm not sure if 5x7 will be enough for 60" reproductions given I cant drop a bundle on a lens, but yet as I understand it the 5x7 bracket is where you get the most bang for your buck...
    5x7 has its admirers, to be sure, but it's less available than either 4x5 or 8x10.

    Most here would say that a V700 can be enlarged about 4x, and maybe up to 6x without too much compromise. Thus, if you want to make 60" prints at high quality, with film scanned in a V700, the starting point for you is 8x10, not anything smaller. The V700 runs out of additional ability to record detail at about 2000 spi.

    For lenses, you'll need a minimum of 5 line pairs/mm, which at 6x (8x10 printed at 60") will require a lens that resolves 30 line pairs/mm. That is not particularly challenging, so 8x10 is not that demanding of lenses except in coverage. If you do normal lenses, a 12" Kodak Commercial Ektar or Ilex-Caltar will be relatively cheap ($200-400) and it will certainly deliver that quality. Short lenses with 8x10 coverage a bit more challenging.

    Not all 8x10 cameras are monstrously expensive. One that is new, from China, that people have been curious about is the Wilderness 8x10, though I can't seem to find a price at the moment. Probably less than a Shen-Hao or a Chamonix, both of which run in the $2500-3000 range for 8x10. But you can also find a used monorail or bed camera for MUCH less--I"ve seen them as cheap as several hundred dollars. But cheap used 8x10's don't come up for sale all that often.

    If you go 4x5, you'll need a lens that resolves 60 line pairs/mm (which the modern designs do), and a better scanning capability. Even with 5x7, you'll need a better scanner than a V700 for that size print, if you don't want to make too many compromises. The 4x5 equipment and materials are a lot cheaper, but when printed at 60", your viewer will need to stand back a bit.

    Rick "who scans 4x5 on a V750, but doesn't make larger than 16x20 prints" Denney

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    89

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    As Dan has mentioned you need to consider if you are planning to shoot colour.

    Colour film, E6 and C41, is almost impossible to source in 5x7.

    However B&W film in 5x7 is readily available, so don't think the format is dead!
    Last edited by jackpie; 3-Sep-2011 at 03:10. Reason: added more positive B&W availability.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    22

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    Thank you Daniel! You’ll notice that I signed up at the start of this year, but didn't get around to asking anything. I never got a panoramic camera because I could always get stitching to work, plus working purely digitally was good for a cheap and fast workflow without compromising on quality. (when i say 'commercial,' i use the term losely, although the gallery does do very well in the summer months)

    Apologies, in my OP read 5x7 as 4x5. I plan to shoot both colour and B&W equally at this time. I appreciate and enjoy shooting B&W far more than colour, but the market prefers colour. 5x7 seems to me to be a good compromise between the two, but the trouble sourcing film in that size is a killer as you mention Rick.

    I would very much like to shoot 8x10, but considering my inexperience, the fact that I will be carrying this camera a lot, and the price differences, as well as lens availability, I think my best choice would be to at least start with 4x5. I also plan to use this camera not only for landscapes but also for architecture and hopefully product photography. I know a monorail camera would be more applicable for the latter but I'm just dipping my toe in here. I will mainly be shooting very long exposure light-painting type landscape photography where tonality is important, so again B&W is probably the way to go here.

    I knew drum scans are the bees knees, but its now clear that if I'm going to eek every bit of quality from 4x5 they will have to become standard.

    thank you all for your quick replies, my confusion is lessening!

    edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by jackpie View Post
    However B&W film in 5x7 is readily available, so don't think the format is dead!
    this has my brain racing

  7. #7
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chillicothe Missouri USA
    Posts
    3,065

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    Jim, 4x5 images can be stitched, too. LF cameras don't have to be new and expensive to perform well. This year I'm upgrading my equipment. For less than the price of the Shen Hao you cited, I've bought a few used 4x5 cameras, extra lenses, and just for fun, a DSLR outfit. The LFcameras that took the greatest photos of a few decades ago are bargains now.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    22

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Jones View Post
    The LFcameras that took the greatest photos of a few decades ago are bargains now.
    Very true. I must keep this in mind.

    As I plan to do large-scale light painting (think car-mounted spotlights driving around) a single exposure is a necessity.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    775

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    I've done 48x60in prints from 4x5 and they look great. I have a drum scanner, and at that huge size a good scan is very important. But I recently spoke with a well-known contemporary fine art photographer and I was shocked to learn that he was using a V750, even for his 50x60 exhibition prints. So take that for what it's worth.

    Drum scans are definitely better though, but buying and maintaining a drum scanner can be expensive over time. A smart route would be to get a v750 and see how it works for you. At the very least you can do your initial scans on the Epson and they'll probably be good enough for portfolio prints, web use and smaller exhibition prints. Then if you need a scan for a huge print, you can outsource a drum scan.

    I hate to start an argument, but for the kind of work you describe precision and rigidity will be extremely important. I wouldn't mess about with a wood landscape camera. If you'll need a lot of movements I'd go for a monorail. The Toyos are nice and solid and inexpensive, but there are lots of options here. If portability is a concern and you don't need a ton of complex camera movements, I'd go for a metal folding field camera. Again, an old Toyo, or even an old press camera could work. Of course, if you can find a good deal, a beater Linhof Technika will last you a lifetime and it's one of the most rigid cameras out there. But you don't have to spend that much, you just need a solid platform to hold your lens and film.

    I hate to break the bad news, but if you do want to print to 60 inches the lens does matter. The old adage that lens quality doesn't matter as much in LF only holds true if you're making contact prints or small enlargements. If you're pushing your negs to huge sizes, you'll need a very good lens.

    You'll spend enough money on film over time to make your lens expenditures seem small. If you get a 135, 150 or 210 Apo Sironar S, you'll be blown away by the quality. They're a little harder to find on the used market but they pop up once in a while and sometimes at very good prices.

    LF can seem complicated but really it's quite simple. And the quality is worth it. When it comes to large prints, you'd have to spend a fortune on an MFDB to even come close do a drum-scanned 4x5 negative.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,015

    Re: LF for large digital reproduction?

    5x7 film is plenty available. No color, and the selection is limited, but if I order some today from the places that stock it, it will be here by Tuesday or Wednesday, no problem.

    5x7 is a great format for scanning. It's almost 2x the area of 4x5, and yet much more manageable than 8x10 as far as the size of holders and well...everything. It also fits on the cheaper, older Epson scanners like the 4870. I've made 13x19 prints from 5x7 negatives that were pretty awesome, scanned on the 4870. Honestly, I've made some pretty stunning 13x19 prints from 4x5 negs that didn't seem to be pushing it at all. I think my prints are pretty good. I don't exactly get the 4x enlargement thing. I've made 8x10s from 35mm negs I've scanned on the 4870 (which is really not suited to doing 35mm) and they came out great too.

    I'd rather take a good negative scanned on a bad scanner by a guy who knows how to scan than the best negative on a great scanner by a guy who doesn't know how to scan.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 86
    Last Post: 2-Aug-2009, 21:05
  2. Fiber Prints from Digital Files
    By Scott Watts in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 30-Aug-2004, 09:46
  3. Why digital?
    By paul owen in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 27-May-2002, 11:45

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •