8x10 Enlarger

akfotog · Nov 15, 2013

OK, so I'm thinking of buying an 8x10 setup. Developing film is simple enough, but I'm not quite sure about enlargements. My 4x5 enlarger won't do the job and although I've found an Elwood 8x10 enlarger here and there, the shipping to Alaska would kill me. Any suggestions? Has anyone had success making their own? Thanks in advance.

Ken Nadvornick · Nov 15, 2013

Depending on the 8x10 camera you end up with, you could just reverse the process and create some sort of setup that will relatively quickly and easily mount the camera for use as it's own horizontal enlarger.

Much earlier in photography I think that was the norm. If one owned only a single lens, that lens did double-duty as both the taking lens and as the projecting lens. One advantage to this was that lens abberations often canceled out. For instance, if the lens had a noticeable edge falloff, this would automatically be compensated for when the direction of the image through it was reversed. However, today I would simply equip such a setup with a more modern enlarging lens.

The biggest problem would be in creating an even, non-leaking light source on the back of the camera. And maybe some sort of negative holder. But that's not something that others haven't already successfully tackled, I would imagine. I have noticed that once in a while various 8x10 light sources (Aristo, etc.) do come up on the ugly auction site for relatively reasonable prices.

Back in the heyday of handheld 4x5 press cameras, the Graflarger attachment worked using this principle.

Ken

akfotog · Nov 15, 2013

Thanks Ken, will have to research that. Sounds feasible though if I can rig up some sort of negative holder.

DREW WILEY · Nov 15, 2013

Old stat or process camera are quite common and can often be had for free. You're more likely to run into one of those up there, covered with
cobwebs in the back room of some print shop, than an 8x10 enlarger per se. But you'd still need to fabricate the neg carrier and the light
source.

David Brown · Nov 15, 2013

Not to rain on your parade, but one of the reasons for shooting 8x10 is contact prints. For enlargements, you appear to already be set up for 4x5. I dare say you would not see much difference in enlargements between 4x5 and 8x10 until you got to prints that measured in feet! But hey, whatever floats your boat.

DREW WILEY · Nov 15, 2013

I can see the difference in an 11x14. Maybe the public can't. Besides, I if you had to defend yourself against a grizzly, wouldn't you prefer a
nice big Ries tripod with spike feet and some mass at the other end?

Ken Nadvornick · Nov 15, 2013

Contact prints from 8x10 negatives are amazing. And the equipment needed is so darned simple. You might consider this option, at least just to get started in that format.

I use the 18x23x1-inch neoprene pad from my dry mount press, flipped over (black side up, yellow felt side down), as the underside support beneath my 4x5 enlarger. I place the negative/paper sandwich on top of that, then cover the sandwich with a 1/4-inch thick 18x23-inch heavy sheet of glass. The glass was cut and edge-beveled for safety by a local glass shop for just this purpose.

The glass has a very, very light coating of clear hair spray applied to the side in contact with the negative. This provides a poor-man's anti-Newton ring capability that works perfectly. The offset space provided by the microscopic dried dots of spray are all that is needed to break up the rings. The dots do not show on the prints.

Before exposure I routinely use a clean hand towel to bear down on the glass as I wipe away any smudges. This has the effect of gently "clamping" the sandwich together. Then I expose.

That's it. The prints are (technically, at least) gorgeous.

Ken

DREW WILEY · Nov 15, 2013

It's not just the weight of the camera that's important. You see, an 8x10 has a much bigger bellows than a 4x5, so you can force out a lot more pepper spray. There are a few tricks to it, however. You don't want to clip the corners of your groundglass, or the pepper will come out
towards you. You need to use a pinhole lensboard, and not a real lens, so the pepper will spray efficiently out the front. And of course, you
need to appeal to the bear's sense of vanity by asking him to pose right in front of the camera, where the spray will have the most impact.

ic-racer · Nov 15, 2013

Enlargements from 8x10 negatives are amazing. And the equipment needed is so darned simple. You might consider this option, at least just to get started in that format.

You may need to do some driving. I drove 15 hours just to get the head for my 8x10 enlarger.

John Bartley · Nov 15, 2013

akfotog said:
Thanks Ken, will have to research that. Sounds feasible though if I can rig up some sort of negative holder.

Cut the centre divider out of an 8x10 film holder and mount a sheet of glass in one side to support the film ??

Tim Boehm · Nov 15, 2013

I'm a contact guy, but I've owned 2 8x10 enlargers, including an Elwood. My suggestion would be, if you can afford it, to get a GOOD enlarger like a Durst or DeVere. Both of those enlargers will let you control alignment much better, etc.

DeVere: http://www.khbphotografix.com/devere/
Durst: http://www.durst-pro-usa.com/products.php

I'm not recommending either company seen at the above links; just providing the links so you can see pictures of enlargers.

Yes, I know it's expensive, but photography ain't a cheap thing.

akfotog · Nov 16, 2013

Thanks for responses all, will have to consider my options before taking the 8x10 plunge.

eclarke · Nov 16, 2013

DREW WILEY said:
I can see the difference in an 11x14. Maybe the public can't. Besides, I if you had to defend yourself against a grizzly, wouldn't you prefer a
nice big Ries tripod with spike feet and some mass at the other end?

Nope, 44 Mag..

adelorenzo · Nov 16, 2013

Can anyone link to some information on the type of light source that would be needed to use an 8x10 camera as an enlarger? That sounds like something I might want to try.

Ken Nadvornick · Nov 16, 2013

Here's an example of an 8x10 camera-to-enlarger conversion from another APUG member. Dan included lots of pictures and descriptions so it's easy to see what's going on.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Ken

wildbill · Nov 16, 2013

David Brown said:
Not to rain on your parade, but one of the reasons for shooting 8x10 is contact prints. For enlargements, you appear to already be set up for 4x5. I dare say you would not see much difference in enlargements between 4x5 and 8x10 until you got to prints that measured in feet! But hey, whatever floats your boat.

well, either you don't shoot both formats or you haven't made enlargements from 8x10 film. Which is it?
I ALSO, can see the difference in an 11x14 enlargement. I wouldn't own the enlarger for the hell of it.

JackRosa · Feb 8, 2014

David Brown said:
Not to rain on your parade, but one of the reasons for shooting 8x10 is contact prints. For enlargements, you appear to already be set up for 4x5. I dare say you would not see much difference in enlargements between 4x5 and 8x10 until you got to prints that measured in feet! But hey, whatever floats your boat.

I am afraid I am going to disagree. There is "something" about an 8x10 negative that a 4x5 cannot 'touch'. It isn't just the sharpness but the gradation of tones. Admittedly, at 11x14 print size, the difference may not be significant but once you start getting into 16x20 or 20x24, the difference jumps at you and bites you right on the face.

8x10 Enlarger

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency