Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,565

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    What do you suppose “this lens is fixed” means?
    just seen it... quite epoxi on it...

    Not repaired by HP, I guess...

    But if would be the right lens for that job, isn't it ?

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Buford, GA
    Posts
    13,152

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    just seen it... quite epoxi on it...

    Not repaired by HP, I guess...

    But if would be the right lens for that job, isn't it ?
    Should work. But it came out of a piece of equipment so it might also have been set for a specific image ratio. And, without knowing what it came out of, you canít know what that image ratio is.

  3. #13
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    7,628

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Since the OP wants to transfer all the info from a 4x5 negative to an 8x10 negative, is he after as close of a match as possible (same curve and density as the original, with no loss in resolution (if that is the correct usage of the word)? Or are there changes happening that allows the 8x10 negative to be reproduced in a different process requiring a different density range? For example a 4x5 neg that makes a great silver gelatin print, and the enlarged 8x10 is used for platinum printing. Some of these changes might drop out some detail in shadows or highlights if not handled carefully.
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Buford, GA
    Posts
    13,152

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    Since the OP wants to transfer all the info from a 4x5 negative to an 8x10 negative, is he after as close of a match as possible (same curve and density as the original, with no loss in resolution (if that is the correct usage of the word)? Or are there changes happening that allows the 8x10 negative to be reproduced in a different process requiring a different density range? For example a 4x5 neg that makes a great silver gelatin print, and the enlarged 8x10 is used for platinum printing. Some of these changes might drop out some detail in shadows or highlights if not handled carefully.
    Going through a lens to duplicate a negative or transparency or to make a print will always result in some loss.

  5. #15
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    14,209

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Will a shotgun kill a duck? Same kind of question. It depends on certain variables including aim. A contact print holds subtle tonality better, while an enlargement allows you actually see more of the detail present, esp when the original is fairly small. Printing from a masked original lets you have your cake and eat it too in certain cases. I certainly know how to make high-quality enlarged negs, but whenever possible, prefer to generate internegs and interpositives via contact.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,565

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    But it came out of a piece of equipment so it might also have been set for a specific image ratio.
    Many times those lenses come from machine vision systems, usually from linear cameras for continuous inspection.

    The magnagon (the same? close match?) is said to have constant performance in the magnification range.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    567

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Has anyone ever made 8X10 prints from 8X10 negatives with an enlarger? Once I started doing that, I never made contact prints again. There may be a very sight difference in image quality, but the trade-off of not having to handle the negative for each test or print, the ease of dodging and burning, the freedom from Newton Rings make it well worthwhile.

  8. #18
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    7,479

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Quote Originally Posted by Neal Chaves View Post
    Has anyone ever made 8X10 prints from 8X10 negatives with an enlarger? Once I started doing that, I never made contact prints again. There may be a very sight difference in image quality, but the trade-off of not having to handle the negative for each test or print, the ease of dodging and burning, the freedom from Newton Rings make it well worthwhile.
    I did once do a comparison test between contact printing and 1:1 projection printing of a 4x5 negative. Once I did that, I hardly ever made an enlargement from 4x5 again.

  9. #19
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    7,628

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Salomon View Post
    Going through a lens to duplicate a negative or transparency or to make a print will always result in some loss.
    I was thinking more along the lines of loss of detail in shadows and/or highlights due to changing the curve of the enlarged film for use in alt. processes (for example: increasing contrast of the new 8x10 neg relative to the original 4x5 negative).
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  10. #20

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    SooooCal/LA USA
    Posts
    1,949

    Re: How much detail is lost enlarging a 4x5 negative to 8X10

    The other thing to remember is a contact print might look sharp, but not necessarily is...

    Due to the necessity that the neg is against paper, diffused light normally used to expose it tends to "spread" around points on neg that can soften the shadow mask the neg provides... A harder light leaves a harder shadow in these places, so sharper...

    The reason it is no big deal is that these "edges" are so small to the naked eye that we don't notice the degrading effect...

    Enlarged images usually have a harder directional light that leaves a harder shadow on the material, so can have a better acutance... The effect was exploited when softer edged materials needed to be "sharpened" before digital technology...

    A lens can be sharper under some different conditions... A key term here would be "point spread function"...

    Steve K

Similar Threads

  1. Enlarging Color 4x5 Negative with 1:1 Ratio Troubleshooting
    By rshorosky in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 27-Oct-2011, 07:00
  2. is a good negative for contact printing also a good negative for enlarging?
    By BetterSense in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 17-Sep-2009, 22:15
  3. digital back with detail and clarity superior to 8X10 transparancy
    By Neal Shields in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 5-Dec-2001, 18:07

Tags for this Thread

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
  •