4x5 or 8x10 for potrait project ?

[Gerry]

Think I am confused, have to read that again.

[Gerry]

Ok I think I got it now, will stick with my 300mm for 8x10, sometimes this techno stuff gets in the way of making photos. Had a talk with Jock Sturges where he just broke it down for me. Use 1 camera, use 1 film, use 1 lens, toss the other gear out! There is alot to that.

[cjbroadbent]

I'll go with Gerry, above, one camera, one lens. But Jock Sturges tossed out an amazing amount of gear! I have the catalogue of Christies sale of his stuff. Seven pages of cameras.
Back to the original question. It you've got a 4x5 enlarger, somehow get your hands on a Cambo twin-lens 4x5.
Otherwise, 8x10 gives you a negative that you can both scan yourself and contact print. (5x7 needs a drum scan to better a home scanned 8x10).
The real secret of LF portraiture is a Prontor shutter and someone else loading the camera.

[stehei]

If it's mostly studio-based work, go with 8*10,
make sure you get strong moddeling lights of permanent light!

I am doing a project right now (b/W), agfa ansco, wollensak classic
300mm lens and a isconar 240mm, and even though I sometimes
wonder why I get into the trouble of carrying this thing around,
the depth and tonality of 8*10 I have never seen surpassed.

I scan my negs with a v700, which is a very competent scanner,
and those are 2GB files, that are handled by PS rather easily.
Advantage? Complete tonality control (I know some people
do not agree, but the curves/shadowhighlight etc are great),
and spotting is so easy. They print very well on my epson
3800.

Even for work on location I lug around all this stuff.
Two things, get completely accustomed to the camera,
its quirks etc, and if possible, get an assistant to change
the plates, it can be hassle talking to your model, and thinking
about the handling routine,

I think you'll find it worth every drop of sweat!

my 2 cents

stefan

[Ben Syverson]

I would shoot 8x10 over 4x5 if the goal was large prints, because it's essentially the difference between having to do a drum scan (4x5) and being able to do a flatbed scan at home (8x10).

Flatbed scans of 4x5 look great, but whether or not they would hold up as 60" prints (12x enlargement) would come down to what level of softness you're comfortable with... I would think you'd want to drum scan any 4x5 that's destined to be that big. Which will get pricey...

But 8x10 to 60" is only a 6x enlargement, which you should be able to manage very well with a $300 (or less...) flatbed scanner.

The entire reason I'm getting into 8x10 is increased scanability...

[Dvenosa]

If you want to print this big I think that money isn't an awful problem, and a basic 8x10 outfit(if you already have a sturdy tripod/head) isn't much more expensive than a 4x5.
Probably you can have the same equipment that Avedon used for 3-4k:

8x10 Deardorff
8x10 Sinar P
Schneider 360mm Symmar s

[Bruce Barlow]

I'm headed towards 8x10 portraits with Alice (my Richard Ritter 8x10). Just did some over the weekend with my 305 G-Claron (4-6 people in the frame). I'll use my 355 G-Claron for "solos."

It was really fun! Even more fun than 4x5, which is hard for me to imagine. I think I'll set up on the streets in Keene and nab passers-by. Give myself one holder per subject, just to make sure I learn how to be good at it.

[BradS]

.... I think I'll set up on the streets in Keene and nab passers-by. Give myself one holder per subject, just to make sure I learn how to be good at it.

Bruce, have you seen Roark Johnson's "Stranger a Day" project? Good stuff.

[Bruce Barlow]

Bruce, have you seen Roark Johnson's "Stranger a Day" project? Good stuff.

No, but I will! Thanks for the tip!