Making a 4x5 print from an 8x10 negative

[Kimberly Anderson]

Ok gang, this is a fun one...

I've got my Durst L184 up and running and have been printing a lot with it over the past few days. I've got an 8x10 portrait that I want to make a 4x5 print of. I've got all of the various condensers, so I'm wondering if there's anything to be gained by playing around with altering the lenses/configurations. I've got lenses up to 360 and down to 50 (I don't think the 50 will cover 8x10 tho... ).

I do have a scanner and *can* scan it and make a digital print...but what's the fun in that...I already know how to do that.

I may be barking up the wrong tree, but as of this point it's kind of gotten in my head and I just want to see if it can be done.

Thanks guys!

[ic-racer]

Specifics are in the manual (Section 6.6.0), but in general you use a lens with the diagonal of the resulting print. So that would be 150mm for 4x5 prints and 50mm for wallet-size. In real life I use my 210mm just to have some extra working space under the lens when making 4x5 prints from 8x10 negatives.

I don't have the condenser head but I believe you'd use the 380/380 combination when using the 150mm lens for a 4x5in print from 8x10 negative. You might want to do a gray test print first.

The projected resolution is double what was originally on the negative but the paper is the limiting factor. If you are printing onto film, then you may be able to capture that resolution.

[djdister]

When I had my Eastman 5x7 Autofocus enlarger, I had an Eastman reducing attachment for it. It was another set of bellows and lens mount that extended below the normal lens stage. That might help as much or more than merely changing lenses.

[jnantz]

hi michael

i use a omega and it requires a long bellows to do any reduction work (like dan's )
... i actually use the aux bellows instead of the cones and rails ...
printing small is like macro work but in reverse (if that makes sense ).
you might also have to reduce the distance between the lens and the paper
being printed on ....
i love making reductions, its fun ..

[Kimberly Anderson]

As I have been working this out in my mind, I see that yes, it is exactly like doing macro work but in reverse. I knew that some of you would have figured out the main parts prior to me futzing with it, so thank you for the tidbits. I'll fart around with this a little bit tomorrow probably.

Thanks!

[Eric Biggerstaff]

You can use a lens extension tube to allow for image size reduction.

[ic-racer]

No need for extra bellows extension for reductions on the L184 as long as the original bellows has not been replaced by a shorter one.

[ic-racer]

This diagram shows the principles involved. For any fixed distance between the negative and the baseboard, there are actually two different focal points for the lens. One focal point gives you an enlargement and the other (closer to the paper) gives you a reduction. Usually, only 8x10 enlargers have enough bellows to do what is shown in the diagram.

Also realize that at 1:1 focusing is tricky because you can easily go from one focal point to the next as they are so close together. This will really mess with your mind unless you know what is going on.

[Harold_4074]

printing small is like macro work but in reverse (if that makes sense )

It is indeed. I have on several occasions made locket-sized prints from 4x5 negatives (i.e., about 1/2" x 3/8") using an Omega D2. After playing with several options (including the building of a wooden lens cone about a foot long) I realized that the only problem with using a 25mm video lens was coverage; I needed something which would make a picture of an object 4x5 inches on a half-frame of 35mm, roughly. A 28mm F-mount Nikkor wide angle turns out to be just perfect; a series-type filter holder both reverses the lens and attaches it to the lens cone via a drilled plate.

A 50mm enlarging lens probably won't cover, but consider how to make a 2x reduction of an 8x10 using a 4x5 camera, then preserve that geometry (including lens orientation) with the paper where the film would have been.

[Tin Can]

Won't help you, but one of my Elwoods came with a 10.5 aluminum reduction tube that fit's right into the normal lens board hole on 5x7 and 8x10 Elwoods.

One of these days...