Where to begin in making very large prints from 4x5?

[bob carnie]

Hi Randy

for the size of print the OP is talking fresh Ilford Warmtone is what I would use and the last time I bought roll paper about a month ago it cost me this amount drop shipped to my location.
I was making 50 inch murals from 35mm strip and it was quite a process.
In my current darkroom I could not do what the OP wants to do, I worked at Jones and Morris Photo Murals and our BW printer at that time showed me how he
made panel murals in BW fibre and it was an incredible setup.

Today I could make a lambda silver print but my Durst is 30 inch platform , but we have made 15 foot prints. Duggal, Lamount Imaging, are two great sources for very large silver gelatin prints from
files at the 50 inch platform, I would thing the print would cost the OP over $1000 US

Bob

Bob Carnie IS an expert and he does what he says. He prints for exhibition for a living.

I am not and do not.

Paper is not necessarily $1200, but it sure can be.

Last night I found this affordable for me option. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...uxe_Black.html

I would NOT be printing wider than 40", but this roll will let me play a bit with a bigger enlargement than I typically do, 16x20".

[Bruce Watson]

It took me a couple of years to get to the point I could make a technically acceptable (to me of course) 12x enlargement. I'm talking about camera technique, not darkroom printing. There's no point in making a print that big unless you have a negative that's worth it. And by worth it, I mean both technically and aesthetically.

I'm sure you'll make good aesthetic decisions without my dodgy advice.

Technically, you'll find that what you've learned using digicams won't help you much, if at all, with a view camera. Just recognize that you've got some learning curves to climb, and don't let the climb get you down. If I can do it, anyone can.

The problem you'll have is that you want to print big. And that means that everything you do making the negative is going to be magnified. If you want to make a 120" print from a 5" wide negative, that's around 25x enlargement. Your technique is going to have to be close to perfect. That means your control of the camera must be top rate, your tripod technique, your exposure technique, all of it must be perfect. I lost an interesting shot made in the rain once -- 15 second exposure (yes, during the day). What happened? I moved. I shifted my weight from one foot to the other. This resulted in a slight movement of the tripod on the spongy rain soaked forest floor. Which gave me a kinda-sorta double exposure. Other than that, I did everything else correctly. But anyone could see that "tiny" mistake in a print of just 3x enlargement. All because I got irritated by a branch dripping rainwater down my back and moved a few cm to the side to avoid it. Boom. Gone.

The other thing you're going to have to deal with in these large prints from photographic film is graininess. If you don't want to see the grain, stay down below 10-12x (depends on the film and processing of course). This points you toward relatively slow emulsions, like TMX, Delta 100, and Acros.

Film has interesting reciprocity characteristics. You'll find that even in daylight, with view camera exposures in the 1/10 of a second range (nothing like the 1/250 shutter speeds of your digicams), it's easy to put some of the negative into reciprocity failure. If you have these problems (some people find this is a creative tool, not a "problem"), this points you toward modern t-grain films as opposed to older cubic-grained films, as the t-grained films typically have better low light performance.

Then you're going to need film processing that gives you completely smooth and even processing. If you're inducing the smallest amount of streaking in your skies, you'll see it with a 25x enlargement. That said, people get all kinds of results from every development technique known. Some people get beautifully smooth and even development from trays. I never could. Some from the BTZS tubes. I never could. I had to move to the Jobo system, and a 3010 drum to get really even development that was repeatable. Whatever it takes is whatever it takes.

You'll have to fight a continuous war of cleanliness also. A 5 micron dust spot enlarged 25x can be clearly visible in your final print. You'll be maintaining your entire process, from keeping dust out of your camera body, to keeping your film holders clean, loading them in a dust free darkroom with excellent technique, using them in the field (hint: don't ever set a film holder down -- it should live only 1) in the camera, 2) in its protective ziplock freezer bag, or 3) on the darkroom table that you load and unload film on. And that's it. You set a film holder down on a rock or a fence post, you may not believe what happens next from a dirt/dust standpoint. Again, been there and done that). You'll get grunge on the film during processing too. I learned all about the benefits of triple steam distilled water ($1/gal at the local store) in processing. And one-shot processing for film. And about keeping your darkroom immaculately clean, and drying processing equipment upside down so dust wouldn't fall into it while it's drying. The cleanliness war is never won, and you can't ever let up if you're after big enlargements.

So... is all this pain worth it? Hell yes. It's hard to describe what a big print that you put so much time and effort into is like. Well worth it IMHO.

[Drew Wiley]

If it's just b&w silver gelatin development you might luck out on finding a used trough developing rig, which cranks the big paper through successive chemical baths similar to wall wallpaper-hanging trays. You can also encounter various do-it-yourself design ideas for these on the web, reasonably affordable if you have decent shop skills. But enlarging itself will take a serious gear commitment. You need a bit of firepower for big enlargements, and a big enough room to back it off onto an aligned horizontal rail system. Cost of the paper depends on the specific paper and square footage of the roll involved. MGWT is obviously one of the most expensive options due to its premium quality. ...which reminds me to bring a wad of cash this weekend for a case of mere 20x24. You also need some way to cut it and attach it to a big wall easel. A step at a time. I eventually dismantled my own nuke-powered horizontal enlarger and went to vertical in a room with a very high ceiling in order to save floor space; but I have to load the thing with a big rolling ladder. No wonder I'm in the mood to make only smaller prints at
the moment.

[Light Guru]

Well thank you, however I prefer film heavily over digital, its just magic to me

So shoot film and scan it.

[Drew Wiley]

The output is different, regardless. An aesthetic as well as practical choice.

[Tin Can]

Check CL in many cities, what you want is for sale right now.

Try Chicago, but it's in LA.

Saltzman. I have no connection or interest.