---would be itty bitty photography, right?
They must have had excellent vision 150 years ago to admire Stanhopes!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanhope_(optical_bijou)
---would be itty bitty photography, right?
They must have had excellent vision 150 years ago to admire Stanhopes!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanhope_(optical_bijou)
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
One curator who once included my own large prints along with even bigger ones from someone else, had the nerve to also invite a few examples from a Jeweler who enjoyed making color 35mm contact prints. Each of those was neatly mounted and framed on a far larger backing, also equipped with a gooseneck magnifier attached to each frame from above. The whole amount of space dedicated to him was less than the area of a single print from we other two!
This - let's hear it for 35mm contact prints! In the same vein, pre-pandemic when they were offering in-person workshops, the George Eastman Museum in Rochester used to have a daguerreotype workshop in which the participants would make 35mm-sized dags, using teeny plates cut to fit in the film gate of a 35mm camera.
FWIW, during my darkroom session last weekend I made 2.25x3.25 inch contact prints. Keepers, not proof prints.
I, 7 Years old, father built me a basement dry box
I was given a MINOX by neighbor, developed the film, contact printed all by my lonesome
I begged for an enlarger, NO WAY daddy roared........... frivolous
Not even if I somehow found the cash
I gave up on tiny contact prints
2X3 I like!
Tin Can
The last couple of years I've been using mostly Minox 8x11. I knew someone back in the day that actually hung contact prints from a Minox in a gallery show. No magnifiers either.
...yeah, and you were also required to check your reading glasses (and any other magnifying devices) at the door!
When I was in LA at the Getty Museum, their photographic gallery had some Walker Evans' shots taken with a Kodak Vest Pocket roll film camera I think 127 format. This picture of the ones mounted on the wall were about the size of 35mm of the Brooklyn Bridge on the left and maybe double that size on the right of NYC from the Brooklyn Bridge. I assume contact prints. So even you can shoot with a Point and Shoot and get published and shown in a famous museum.
Flickr Home Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
< thumbs up >
Somewhat in the same vein, I think contact prints of small pinhole-camera negatives often work very well. With conventionally sharp pictures made with good lenses there's sometimes a tension between the tonal subtlety of contact printing and and image detail that "wants" more magnification to be perceived clearly. Not so much an issue with pinhole or toy-lens images, of course.
Bookmarks