8x10 contact print

[John Kasaian]

percy,

As much as I love 8x10, let me tell you----its absolutely the worse camera for some (rare) situations----and thats what speed graphics are for....or your cell phone ;-)

Welcome to 8x10!

[robert_4927]

Jorge, I've been meaning to ask. What's the status on that new Ulf you've been waiting for? I think it was ( or is) a 20x24 wasn't (isn't) it?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

It fell through Robert. Jim is still working on his design but could not assure me he would have the camera by the end of this month, so I had to get a refund to buy another one. At the moment I am thinking who to go with or to build my own.

[robert_4927]

sorry to hear that Jorge. I thought he was delivering it personally the last time I heard anything. There was a 16x20 wisner with a 14x17 reducing back just on ebay for sell. It didn't meet the reserve price so I imagine it is still for sale. This included film holders and cases. I think the highest bid was 5600.00 or something like that. I know that's a little small for you but something you might want to consider. Hope it works out for you, I've been looking forward to seeing some 20x24 pt/pd prints. Hope you find a solution soon.

[Scott Davis]

I started off shooting medium format, then devolved down to 35mm, then up to 4x5 and now 8x10. I'd love to unload most of my 35 gear, but it does make a useful tool from time to time when I want to do cheap happy-snaps. My Hassy now feels like the point-n-shoot after shooting an entire vacation on 4x5, and the 4x5 is the 'small' camera. One of these days I'll get my hands on a 7x17 or maybe even an 8x20 so I can sell off the Xpan and still shoot panoramics. The big stuff is just so addictive, you don't care about the compromises you have to make to use it.

[Herb Cunningham]

percy: I have a few 4x5s sitting around and cannot remember how I used to think that that was "large format" the dinky little negatives! only 4x5 inches!

It depends on where you stand.

good luck

[jonathan smith]

I think the 8x10 system is easier. I got frustrated with 35mm years ago, got rid of the enlarger, mostly because nothing was good enough quality-wise. All those years for me, and for most photographers I talked to, 8x10 was a pipe dream. When I finally decided to do it, I realized you don't need much besides the camera and a piece of glass. Ok, the tripod's pretty big, but it's not actually absolutely necessary.

I think what I like the most is considering one composition at a time, instead of burning off 36 before you can see what you've shot. And never with 35mm did I stand there for two hours waiting for the light right, for the shadows to creep down to the right point.

[Erich]

Jonathon,
Just curious if you have any suggestions on what to use in the absence of a tripod - maybe a sand bag or bean bag or, is any solid surface the answer?

As background, I used to shoot a lot of large format, 3-1/4x4-1/4 and 4x5 but that was many years ago. I have been shooting only 35 and digital for a while now. I acquired an old 8x10 from an acquaintance for free. I had the lens/shutter cleaned and rehabed. I am not sure that I want to get back into large format and have not wanted to make a big investment in a tripod for something that I may not want. But... I can't forget how absolutely incredible the photos from large format appear. The sharpness, detail, clarity are second to none. I don't know... I am sitting on the fence here.

I have film, lots of film holders (including some for 5x7 that I will never use)... just need a solution to not having a suitable tripod.