Is it worth buying 8x10 to cut to 4x5?

[endley]

Hi everyone,

I've tried mostly paper negatives, direct positives, and mostly Foma 200. I've used some HP4, and FP4. Couldn't allocate as much time and budget as I had initially planned for since starting LF around an year ago.

I'm tempted to buy near expiry TMax 320 in 8x10 being offered for a considerable discount (bringing it to Foma range).

Need to know if cutting to 4x5 is worth the discount - or should I just wait for a similar deal in the correct size to pop up?

I've not cut paper or film before but could practice cutting x-ray film before giving this Kodak film a go.

Thanks,
Vinay

[Tin Can]

Since 8X10 is slightly smaller than actual 8X10......bad idea

Glass plates were actual size, but film not for 129 years

Buy a bigger camera!

I cut larger X-Ray all the time

[endley]

Thank you.
Buying a couple of 13x18 DDS solely for x-ray film should be cheaper than going 8x10 at this time as I'm still testing waters with a 5x7/5x4 Norma and a super graphic. I have a lens that will cover 810 when I muster enough courage to make that leap. Thanks again for insight. I'll let this one go.

[maltfalc]

get the film. it'll be a little harder to cut than x-ray film since you'll be doing it in the dark, but you should be fine with a decent cutter.

Since 8X10 is slightly smaller than actual 8X10......bad idea

Glass plates were actual size, but film not for 129 years

Buy a bigger camera!

I cut larger X-Ray all the time

4x5 is also smaller than 4"x5". 8x10 film is the correct size to be cut down to 4x5, almost as if the people making film in both formats from the same giant rolls of film with the same machinery planned it that way...

[jnantz]

hi vinay

practice cutting paper down to size before you do it with film, and make a "jig" and get some "night vision goggles" ( I've read for years you can get toy store versions and they work great but never purchased them ). cutting film can be tricky if you use a swing arm ( guillotine ) paper cutter and / or rotary blade. sometimes the film pulls as it's being cut and cutting the wrong size is a pain. but it's doable using a sharp utility / x-acto blade and a straight edge ( with cork maybe or something on top of the film to protect it from being scratched ) works well too. the 1/16" less then 8x10, 4x5 all around makes it a nuisance unless you get it just right. I remember years ago I bought an armload of film from J+C that was off by 1/16". good for me, not so good for them
... don't forget to notch ( even with a small hole punch ) so you know which side to expose.
have fun!
John

[John Layton]

IMHO - unless a particular size is impossible to come by or needed prior to group order schedule, I would never recommend cutting film down - especially from one sheet to four. Too much handling (introduction of excessive dust, fingerprints, rub marks), too much margin for notch orientation error, too much chance of creating swaged-over, sharp edges which can facilitate scratching during shuffle (tray) processing and/or during repackaging/storage.

Then again...I only did this (cutting down) for a very brief period, years ago, and so perhaps others have better luck with reliable consistency.

[Eric Woodbury]

Nope.

[Bernice Loui]

"Penny wise_Pound Foolish"
For all the $, effort and resources involved with cutting down 8x10 to 4x5, this will be a net negative once you've added all involved up.

Cost for film and processing is a fixed item with sheet film. Cost reduction = imposing specific trade offs.


Bernice

[Vaughn]

I suggest working with a film one can consistantly get, and dial it in for one's use by making prints, or whatever one's desired end result/product is. Expensive film gets cheaper if one does not 'waste' any of it. Keep exposure and developing notes, and then one can repeat the successes and learn to see the possibilities beyond one's results.

[Bernice Loui]

Excellent suggestion.

Starting out on the LF view camera journey, there can be a tendency to wanna "experiment" with too much including film. More than agreeing with Vaughn, choose on sheet film, stay with it, develop a relationship with that film and learn it well. This coupled with skilled and careful use of any lens/view camera/support system and all related can greatly reduce film waste. Once good at this sheet film stuff, there should be a point where one sheet of film results in the image goal in mind. This IS how best to cost reduce and be cost effective with film and all related cost.

Exception being, a very uncommon film in a film size needed that is also no common. This falls into the highly specialized need category.


Bernice

I suggest working with a film one can consistantly get, and dial it in for one's use by making prints, or whatever one's desired end result/product is. Expensive film gets cheaper if one does not 'waste' any of it. Keep exposure and developing notes, and then one can repeat the successes and learn to see the possibilities beyond one's results.