Invest in 4x5 equipment?

[chuckroast]

Oh my! I have never had the opportunity to visit the Netherlands, although my sister has because her husband is Dutch. I have had the opportunity to view some original Vermeer and
Van Gogh paintings up close in person, without any time pressure. Those are almost in a class by themselves. An I've seen plenty of older Dutch miniatures - quite remarkable detail; don't know if they had some kind of magnifying glass or not back in Medieval days. But the native Americans near here made miniature wedding baskets interwoven with hummingbird feathers, with certain patterns so small they can't even be seen with the naked eye. Likewise with a few Ice Age artifacts I've found, meticulously crafted in miniature. Must have done it by feel alone. Reminds me of a local photographer, a jeweler by day, who contact printed his 35mm slides and displayed them under individual gooseneck magnifying glasses. Wonder what grandiose Gursky would think about that?

You'd love that movie I cited above.

 

[gbroadbridge]

Those of us who do both - make prints and display digitally, need to choose the most demanding standard in order to be able to obtain results that succeed for our purposes.

I think you're saying that you need to provide two different outputs, each one optimised for the intended display format.
Which I think is what most folks who are in that position actually do.

 

[wiltw]

We were discussing scanning the print. You didn't address that point.

"But you're scanning the "standard" print for the web. So all the issues you mentioned are the same."

And I was responding to the quoted statement of yours, about 'no two chemical prints are the same'.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

If you take that scan, resize the resulting digital file so that it will present appropriately on a screen - even a 4K 70" one - and then make a 11x14 print from the resized file, in almost all cases the subsequent print will be markedly poorer than the initial print.
So if you aim for a standard that will look great on a 70" screen, you are handicapping yourself if you also want an 11x14 print as well. The print requires a different standard.
Those of us who do both - make prints and display digitally, need to choose the most demanding standard in order to be able to obtain results that succeed for our purposes.

My purposes are different than yours. Otherwise, it's like arguing that film is better than digital, making APUG better than Photrio.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I think I was misunderstood.
I didn't suggest that it was worth shooting 4x5 or that it was a poor financial investment. But as someone who already owns 35mm, MF, and 4x5 equipment, where would you put future $?

 

[Chuck1]

Film

 

[chuckroast]

I think I was misunderstood.
I didn't suggest that it was worth shooting 4x5 or that it was a poor financial investment. But as someone who already owns 35mm, MF, and 4x5 equipment, where would you put future $?

Leicas, always Leicas

 

[Besk]

All of my cameras and lenses are "good enough" for my purposes and if this is the case with you, that leaves film, storage systems etc. to invest in.

 

[gbroadbridge]

Film

+1

This is likely to be the greatest impediment going forward.
Either shortage or cost.

 

[Pieter12]

I think I was misunderstood.
I didn't suggest that it was worth shooting 4x5 or that it was a poor financial investment. But as someone who already owns 35mm, MF, and 4x5 equipment, where would you put future $?

Film, paper, workshops...

 

[MattKing]

Film, paper, workshops...

I'm just picturing what it would be like to be offering a darkroom printing workshop and arriving to find Ralph is one of the participants......

 

[gbroadbridge]

I'm just picturing what it would be like to be offering a darkroom printing workshop and arriving to find Ralph is one of the participants......

Digital printing workshop. lol.