Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: 4x5 versus 8x10 portriats

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,176

    Re: 4x5 versus 8x10 portriats

    I have been working on portrait photography in general for a while now (mostly in private since my subjects don't necessarily want their images posted online), and I specifically have a goal to do a lot of this work in 8x10. It has an incredible look due to the combination of depth of field for a given focal length.

    Yes, I guess you could use a 50mm f/0.9 on 35mm film and get something similar to a wide open 14" Kodak Commercial Ektar in terms of depth of field, but you would not get the smooth tonality, the ability to contact print, or the ability to make a huge enlargement (either traditional or from a scan).

    If contact prints or enormous enlargements are not in the mix, then the argument for using 8x10 over 4x5 is a little harder to make.
    Last edited by John NYC; 11-Feb-2012 at 22:07. Reason: added something

Similar Threads

  1. dumping 8x10 and sticking with 4x5. anyone regret?
    By Daniel_Buck in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 3-Dec-2010, 09:04
  2. Format for 60x75 inch Gallery Prints - 4x5 or 8x10?
    By e2aa in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 11-Aug-2009, 21:47
  3. 4x5 or 8x10
    By don mills in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 2-Jun-2009, 05:51
  4. 8x10 400NC vs. 4x5 160NC
    By Chad Shindel in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 7-Feb-2006, 20:50

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
  •