enlarging medium format film

cs_foto · Aug 10, 2010

Hi guys,

I have a quick question, how big can you go when enlarging a 6x6 medium format frame?

I found a lab that can do 1.80mts x 180mts analogue prints, but I'm a bit conecerned of the quality... it will be a fine art print, so quality has to be up to a standard.

The film used was fuji pro 160s and has enough density....

Are there any tricks worth trying when enalrging to that size?

Cheers

Jesper · Aug 10, 2010

That is all up to your expectations.
Remember that a 6cm neg to a 1.8m print is 30x enlargement which means that if you will not be able to have a print sharp enough for close up viewing, and you will also see grain quite clearly.
Is that ok?
Then try it.

As a test you could scan a negative and enlarge it 30x just to see what happens to grain and sharpness.
Step away from the screen and look at it at the distance that you will be watching the print and see if it is OK.

Personally I would recommend a larger negative size for a print that big, but it all depends on what you are planning to do with it.

Christopher Walrath · Aug 10, 2010

I have seen a small slide blown up to a wall mural (maybe 6x10 feet). You can really notice it when you're standing right in front of it, can't help but too. But from across the room, it's really awesome. So many things come into play with a print. Not only expectations of the results but also intention in use. There's no limit as long as you realize what you're going to get from the format and you know how to display it in the proper fashion.

cs_foto · Aug 10, 2010

Hi thanks for the input,

In regards to how it will be displayed, I expect to have it framed and hang into a wall - hopefully in someones living room

I have heard that slides can be enlarged easier by having them photographed on 10"x8" (or 5"x4") colour neg and then enlarging from that...

Cheers

pentaxuser · Aug 10, 2010

I have seen 5 foot by 4 foot blow-ups of Steve McCurry's Kodachrome 35mm slides and at normal viewing distance for such prints they were superb. Based on this 1.8 x 1.8 metres which is only a little bigger but from a 6x6 neg should be OK. However this depends on two things:
1. Do prints from Kodachrome slides look sharper than similar prints from 6x6 negs?

2. More importantly, if we we're standing together looking at the same McCurry print would my "superb" be your "less than satisfactory"?

pentaxuser

Sirius Glass · Aug 10, 2010

As big as you want, if you have an enlarger and a good enough lens.

Steve

nworth · Aug 11, 2010

It depends on the the subject, the exhibit, and the viewing distance. MF is frequently used to make prints up to about that size, and they usually work well. On close examination, you will definitely see grain and a lack of sharpness. But prints that size are generally viewed at a distance, and those defects will not be visible. Some subjects also tolerate them very well. Often, prints that size are not viewed critically but are rather used to convey an impression or to create an atmosphere for the exhibit. That also creates a situation where minor problems of sharpness are not as important.

andrewkirkby · Aug 12, 2010

A good enlarger with a nice apochromatic corrected lens is recommended.

Bigger is not always best though... This will depend on the viewing distance and subject.

Steve McCurry prints all his work digitally from scans using inkjet, by the way.

enlarging medium format film

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency