Newbie Question: is 8x10 Contact Printing for Me?

[Alan9940]

TA: if you're looking for "wow", you are likely to be disappointed. Contact printing is about subtlety of tone and detail, and IMO serves most effectively in quiet pictures that reveal themselves fully only with extended acquaintance. Many viewers will never see the differences, or will see them but not consider them important.

What a succinct way to say what I was trying to say! And, so true!!

[mdarnton]

I think it's time to insert something Georg Solti said to the Chicago Symphony:
We do what we do for ourselves; very few people in the audience will understand any of it.

If you are shooting for other people's standards, your cell phone should suffice.

[tgtaylor]

This is a low resolution scan of an 8x10 contact print which will give you an idea of what to expect. The distance to the downtown buildings is 8 to 10 miles.

San Francisco (from the east)



Toyo 810G, 360mm Schneider Symmar-S, Ilford Delta 100. Untoned contact print on Oriental glossy RC.

Thomas

Thomas

[Neal Chaves]

Once I had a good 8X10 enlarger (a self-converted Beseler 4X5), I never made contact prints again. 8X10 contacts are very nice and that AZO paper was great, but now if I want an 8X10 print from an 8X10 negative, I make it 1:1 with the enlarger.

[Alan9940]

Thomas, and taken with that MONSTER of a lens! I have a 360mm Symmar-S, too, and have taken many of my finest negs with that lens. But, now that I'm getting along in my years I've settled on a 360mm Fuji which is still a hefty piece of glass, but not nearly as large as that "sandwich plate front element" Symmar lens!

[Ben Calwell]

"Many viewers will never see the differences, or will see them but not consider them important."
Thanks, Oren, for pointing out the inappropriate description "wow." I knew I was lacking in the "subtlety of tone and detail" department. Maybe someday (after about 40 years shooting LF), I'll see the differences and consider them important.

[Oren Grad]

"Many viewers will never see the differences, or will see them but not consider them important."
Thanks, Oren, for pointing out the inappropriate description "wow." I knew I was lacking in the "subtlety of tone and detail" department. Maybe someday (after about 40 years shooting LF), I'll see the differences and consider them important.

Profuse apologies if I wasn't clear: I didn't mean to be criticizing you in any way. On the contrary - I borrowed the term "wow" because I thought it nicely captured what the OP seemed to be getting at.

Similarly, the bit about not seeing differences or not considering them important was not meant as a criticism or a value judgment. For all of us there are distinctions in the world that we don't even perceive, and others that we do perceive but don't care about; it's just what they are that varies. It goes with being human.

[asf]

I like mdarnton's Solti quote

Have heard it before but it strikes me more now as I lug around the enormous 810G and under the load sometimes find myself wondering why
Also really enjoy shooting 5x7 but in the end only 8x10 feels really special
I've been scanning negs for a while but think it's time to get back to contact printing

[Maris Rusis]

A friend prompted me to think about why I chose the 8x10 black and white contact photograph as my principle form. This is what I wrote:

The 8x10 contact is a canonical form with a deep history in photography.
Grievous error aside all 8x10 contacts are technically equivalent; mine, yours, Ed Weston's, Ansel Adams'.
No upgrade is possible or necessary.
No grain ever. Infinite sharpness and gradation are available with no particular effort.
Cheap materials. From go to whoa for less than $5 if you buy smart and watch your expenses.
Enough possibilities for a lifetime of work.
Thousands of 8x10s can be stored, they can be mailed, displayed conveniently, and they won't become a logistics nightmare like a huge pile of big pictures.
No elaborate darkroom is required, no enlarger; just a safelighted work space, a lightbulb, and a few trays.
I can do everything from film exposure to mounting, matting, and framing. No need to buy expensive services from back-room people.
No competition. Why would I strive against 50 million hard working and talented digital shooters climbing over each other's backs trying to get noticed?
Anything well photographed on 8x10 seems to acquire a nobility that invites attention.
The 8x10 photographer is pretty well guaranteed to be taken more seriously than someone plinking away with a cell-phone.
Ultimate conceptual integrity. The 8x10 is seen, exposed, processed, finished, mounted, and displayed without changing its original size or its original vision.
There is no cropping. The photographer takes full responsibility for the content right to the edges and corners. The viewer knows they are not short-changed.
No digital technology is used or required. No files need reformating into new media. Everything is eye readable. The medium guarantees it.

What do you think? Did I miss something?

[Alan Gales]

I like 8x10 because I love composing on that big ground glass, it's the largest negative that I can use on my Epson flat bed scanner and when I get the room I eventually want to contact print. Photography is a hobby to me so I do what makes me happy.