Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    24

    8x10 poor man's enlargement

    I have some 8x10 negatives and I would like to enlarge them. I have no 8x10 enlarger, so I did contact prints.
    I took pictures of this contact prints with a Pentax 6x7 (150mm lens and extension tube).
    I enlarged one of the Pentax pictures to 16x20.
    I'm a newbie in enlarging.
    Did somebody use this technique with succes ? Has somebody a recommandation, except buying an 8x10 enlarger !

  2. #2
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    5,728

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    Seems reasonable, but I'd think that if you were there with the 6x7cm camera in the first place the results would be better than going though the trouble of the 8x10in negative.

    How did they come out?

  3. #3
    8x10, 5x7, 4x5, et al Leigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    5,438

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    I would suggest making an 8"x10" enlargement from your 6x7 negative and comparing it to the original print.

    That will tell you what fidelity you can expect from your method.

    As racer pointed out, unless you're planning to have an 8x10 enlarger in the future to take advantage of the high-quality negatives, you're introducing additional time, effort, and expense into the process but deriving no benefit therefrom.

    - Leigh

  4. #4
    hacker extraordinaire
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,330

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    That's not completely accurate. 8x10 cameras, with their different physics and movements, can still impact your photography the way a 6x7 camera cannot.
    Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a computer. Art is everything else we do.
    --A=B by Petkovšek et. al.

  5. #5
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    7,929

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    If your enlarger can handle 4x5's, that would give you a little more a little better enlargement with the 4x5 neg, it having about 3x the acreage of the 6x9 (everything else being equal, of course).

    I am assuming you just have a few 8x10 negs to enlarge and this will not be your standard way of producing work.

    The high-end way to go about it would be to have the 8x10 neg scanned, Photoshop the scan to your heart's delight, and then have a negative made from the file at the size you want the print , and just contact that onto sliver gelatin papers. The learning curve and the expense is a bit steep.

  6. #6
    Death Before Digital matthew klos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    83

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    Yeah, there just seems to be way to much work here. To go out and make a 8x10 neg than to just go back to sizing it down, seems like a real waste to me. 8x10 contact prints can look really sexy.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 1997
    Location
    Baraboo, Wisconsin
    Posts
    7,694

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    Considering that you've made a 16x20 print from a 6x7 negative that was itself a photograph of an 8x10 print your print quality is considerably worse than what you would have gotten from an 8x10 (or even 6x7) of the original scene enlarged to 16x20. Buy a scanner that accepts 8x10 negatives, learn to use it, you'll get much better results sending the scan to a decent lab and you'll go to a lot less trouble once you learn how to scan.
    Brian Ellis
    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
    a mile away and you'll have their shoes.

  8. #8

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    If your enlarger can handle 4x5's, that would give you a little more a little better enlargement with the 4x5 neg, it having about 3x the acreage of the 6x9 (everything else being equal, of course).

    I am assuming you just have a few 8x10 negs to enlarge and this will not be your standard way of producing work.

    The high-end way to go about it would be to have the 8x10 neg scanned, Photoshop the scan to your heart's delight, and then have a negative made from the file at the size you want the print , and just contact that onto sliver gelatin papers. The learning curve and the expense is a bit steep.
    Vaughn,
    I have messed a bit with digital negatives and i agree the curve is very steep...the expense is not all that bad really if you have a good basic set up to start with. The main expense for me was/is the time to fine tune the process.

    One reason I went to 810 is to do away with enlargers! I am happy for now contact printing.

    Do you know of anyone making digital negatives comercially?

    I have heard rumor that there was a 810 convesion head for the bessler 45 series enlargers. Any truth to that?


    thanks
    david

  9. #9
    Death Before Digital matthew klos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    83

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    There is a conversation head, but it was not well designed. We have one at my school.

  10. #10
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    7,929

    Re: 8x10 poor man's enlargement

    Quote Originally Posted by atlcruiser View Post
    Vaughn,

    Do you know of anyone making digital negatives comercially?

    I have heard rumor that there was a 810 convesion head for the bessler 45 series enlargers. Any truth to that?


    thanks
    No I do not. Years ago a photographer I know was having 4x5 negatives scanned and after working on the scans, he had 16x20 negs made by a service bureau (I believe they were made on film -- "Imagesetter" may be what it is called). He liked the process because he could make images from negatives that had problems with such things as local contrast that made if difficult, if not impossible to print in the darkroom. He said he no longer had to stand for hours in the darkroom -- but instead had to sit for hours in front of a computer screen! Always trade-offs!

    I believe this was one of the images he showed me at the time of this discussion:

    http://www.huntingtonwitherill.com/g...il/529/21.html

    But he had the process nailed down very well. He did not have to worry about exposure time, contrast, or burning/dodging -- that was all dialed in in the making of the enlarged negative. But it did take time and working closely with the service bureau to achieve it.

    Vaughn

Similar Threads

  1. choosing a 8x10 BW film for big digital enlargement
    By archivue in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 15-Jan-2011, 12:52
  2. dumping 8x10 and sticking with 4x5. anyone regret?
    By Daniel_Buck in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 3-Dec-2010, 09:04
  3. Shoot 4x10 with an 8x10 camera
    By Ling Z in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 31-Mar-2008, 09:52

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
  •