Ridiculous question about small contact prints

MattKing · Sep 6, 2015

I am sitting here at a desk with a trytich frame on the wall above it - three 4x5 prints, side by each.

They were postcards I received in one of my first APUG postcard exchanges.

A 4x5 enlarger, a few developing tubes and a beseler or similar roller agitator don't necessarily take a lot of space.

waynecrider · Sep 6, 2015

Best of luck with your endeavor. Remember to allow money and space for film and paper, and processing which is better done cheaply in trays or tanks. Enlargers can be gotten pretty cheap if you look around. Back when digital was just coming on the scene in a big way i never paid more then $100 for a 4x5 model. Burning and dodging is an art (if needed) and best done to start on larger sizes., otherwise you need to pay alot of attention to metering and developing to seperate yor tones, especially for small contacts. Lf is definitely fun, but slow, and you'll always need something else to spend mone on so think about buying a good used camera.

Jim Jones · Sep 6, 2015

Edward Weston rarely made anything except contact prints, and he was reasonably successful. Even the Book Nudes, compiled by him and Nancy Newhall but never published, would have contained images printed the size of contact prints, 8x10 and smaller.

Sirius Glass · Sep 6, 2015

Jim Jones said:
Edward Weston rarely made anything except contact prints, and he was reasonably successful. Even the Book Nudes, compiled by him and Nancy Newhall but never published, would have contained images printed the size of contact prints, 8x10 and smaller.

As noted Edward Weston heavily used contact prints.

Normally I enlarge everything after I make contacts prints to review the negatives. Still when I shoot 4"x5" I really enjoy working with and viewing contact prints.

mdarnton · Sep 6, 2015

5x7 is a great size. For my own enjoyment, 5x7 prints from 35mm are totally sufficient, and I have boxes of them. When I feel like I need something classier, I print 5x7 on 8x10 Our quick response is to dismiss anything smaller, yet we find smaller sizes fine in magazines and on the web, no problem. And as Matt King mentions above, no one complains about post cards being too small, either. The big print thing is just a mindset to get beyond.

RobC · Sep 6, 2015

here's a 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 contact print for a mere £2250

http://www.beetlesandhuxley.com/gallery/fashion/joanna-lumley-1966-fashion-shoot-selfridges.html

Sirius Glass · Sep 6, 2015

RobC said:
here's a 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 contact print for a mere £2250

http://www.beetlesandhuxley.com/gallery/fashion/joanna-lumley-1966-fashion-shoot-selfridges.html

I will have to be more careful of my 2 1/4" x 2 1/4" contact prints, I never realized that they were so valuable.

eddie · Sep 6, 2015

Shawn Dougherty has some really nice small contact prints in the Gallery. I don't print small very often, but I have a huge amount of respect for those that do. Aside from the problems in dodging/ burning minute areas, small prints require a more "intimate" effort from the viewer.

TheFlyingCamera · Sep 7, 2015

RobC said:
here's a 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 contact print for a mere £2250

http://www.beetlesandhuxley.com/gallery/fashion/joanna-lumley-1966-fashion-shoot-selfridges.html

Totally off-topic, but I didn't realize that Joanna Lumley will be 70 next year. She looks damn good for her age.

RobC · Sep 7, 2015

TheFlyingCamera said:
Totally off-topic, but I didn't realize that Joanna Lumley will be 70 next year. She looks damn good for her age.

That is a 1966 image.

Today the cracks are showing...

removed account4 · Sep 7, 2015

hi alabamacoffeebean

check out the habs-program at the library of congress
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/hh/
the lion's share of the work is 4x5 contact prints ..
lots of good stuff there ... small images are really nice
one who looks at little prints is draw in and it is more of a study
than being absorbed by a giant image. both are nice but small is more of a
hold in your hands kind of thing.
5x7 cameras are usually not much more expensive than 4x5 ones
and you get the bonus of 2 formats ... and often times lenses that cover 4x5 will illuminate
and cover a 5x7 negative. 5x7 also give huge bellows so if you want to do macro work with a 4x5 lens ( or smaller )
that can be an option too.

good luck !

Alabamacoffeebean · Sep 7, 2015

Thanks for all the replies, guys. I had to laugh at some of my responses, though. I have a hard time writing out the stuff I'm thinking, so some of my posts probably read like drunken ramblings

Anyway, if I go the new route, I'm in love with the Shen Hao PTB 4x5. It weighs 3 pounds, according to the Badger Graphic website, which is lighter than I expected it to weigh; for some reason, I was expecting it to be a 20+ pound beast of a machine . Hopefully that means it'll work on my Quantaray QSX Digi Pro 8500 tripod. It holds a Pentax K-1000 with 135mm lens no problem, but that camera probably tops out at around 1LB

TheFlyingCamera · Sep 7, 2015

RobC said:
That is a 1966 image.

Today the cracks are showing...

I know- you could see it already (granted they emphasized them with makeup) in Absolutely Fabulous, and that's got to be what, 15 years old now? But I saw a picture of her taken maybe 2 years ago on IMDB and she still looked good at 67. But I think she's also been open about having work done.

4season · Sep 7, 2015

I don't think Edward Weston owned an enlarger at all: I once saw an exhibit of his works and don't think anything was larger than 8x10. Beautiful prints!

TheFlyingCamera · Sep 7, 2015

Alabamacoffeebean said:
Thanks for all the replies, guys. I had to laugh at some of my responses, though. I have a hard time writing out the stuff I'm thinking, so some of my posts probably read like drunken ramblings

Anyway, if I go the new route, I'm in love with the Shen Hao PTB 4x5. It weighs 3 pounds, according to the Badger Graphic website, which is lighter than I expected it to weigh; for some reason, I was expecting it to be a 20+ pound beast of a machine . Hopefully that means it'll work on my Quantaray QSX Digi Pro 8500 tripod. It holds a Pentax K-1000 with 135mm lens no problem, but that camera probably tops out at around 1LB

Don't. Just don't. While a reasonably light-weight tripod will hold the Shen Hao, the question is more the rigidity than the weight support. A Shen-Hao might weigh in under 4 lbs with a lens, but it has cubic volume that a 35mm camera with motor drive and a fast tele doesn't have, and the bellows will act like a sail/vibration producing device in the wind. Do yourself a big favor and get a more solid tripod. It doesn't have to be a thousand dollar Gitzo carbon fiber tripod or some other excess monster, but you do want something with leg cross-sections bigger than your pinky (or even your thumb!) for a camera like that. A used Manfrotto aluminum tripod is perfectly fine even if a bit stout.

Alabamacoffeebean · Sep 7, 2015

TheFlyingCamera said:
Don't. Just don't. While a reasonably light-weight tripod will hold the Shen Hao, the question is more the rigidity than the weight support. A Shen-Hao might weigh in under 4 lbs with a lens, but it has cubic volume that a 35mm camera with motor drive and a fast tele doesn't have, and the bellows will act like a sail/vibration producing device in the wind. Do yourself a big favor and get a more solid tripod. It doesn't have to be a thousand dollar Gitzo carbon fiber tripod or some other excess monster, but you do want something with leg cross-sections bigger than your pinky (or even your thumb!) for a camera like that. A used Manfrotto aluminum tripod is perfectly fine even if a bit stout.

haha, damn that wind resistance! I didnt think of that

Sirius Glass · Sep 7, 2015

Alabamacoffeebean said:
haha, damn that wind resistance! I didnt think of that

Almost as good but less expensive are the Induro tripods and heads.

removed account4 · Sep 8, 2015

look for an old tiltall tripod
tough as nails, and cheap as dirt, and it will easily
hold a shen hao camera. it was used for years with a graphic view II
and still gets used with speed graphics and other not so giant cameras..
good luck !
john

Lauris · Sep 20, 2015

jnanian said:
look for an old tiltall tripod
tough as nails, and cheap as dirt, and it will easily
hold a shen hao camera. it was used for years with a graphic view II
and still gets used with speed graphics and other not so giant cameras..
good luck !
john

Any hints as to what model? Been looking for a better vintage (older, cheaper) tripod myself

Alan Gales · Sep 20, 2015

Lauris said:
Any hints as to what model? Been looking for a better vintage (older, cheaper) tripod myself

The Marchioni brothers or the Leitz versions are the ones to buy. The later Chinese versions are cheaper made.

http://tiltallsupport.blogspot.com/p/tiltall-support.html

Sirius Glass · Sep 20, 2015

Lauris said:
Any hints as to what model? Been looking for a better vintage (older, cheaper) tripod myself

Instead of a vintage tripod, save the weight and buy a carbon fiber tripod. To save money on a fiber tripod, buy an Induro tripod.

http://www.indurogear.com/

removed account4 · Sep 20, 2015

Lauris said:
Any hints as to what model? Been looking for a better vintage (older, cheaper) tripod myself

this is the one i have, or one just like it
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tiltal-trip...E-CONDITION-/271856994691?hash=item3f4bf08983

i got it for $99 from b+h around 1987-8

d there is a threaded do-hickey on the bottom of center column and one of the legs unscrews,
so it is a mono-pod too ...

ColinRH · Sep 21, 2015

Have a look at my Gallery page - there are some 6x9 salt prints and 6x6 salt prints (they are the 2 French prints).
I think they can look very good.

Vaughn · Sep 21, 2015

ColinRH said:
Have a look at my Gallery page - there are some 6x9 salt prints and 6x6 salt prints (they are the 2 French prints).
I think they can look very good.

I think it is quite funny how when we make these small intimate images, then when they are shown on the computer, we blow them up to 8x8, 10x10, or whatever depending on the size of one's screen! The next time I have a show of 6x6 contacts, I'll include a few magnifying glasses for the audience!

DREW WILEY · Sep 21, 2015

A few months ago I showed a photographer/architect friend of mine that 6x6 carbon contact print you made, Vaughn. He shoots 6x6 himself
and recently returned from viewing a large show of carbons in Germany. But there were no miniature prints there. Somehow the web just
doesn't begin to do justice to these. But I once shared a venue with a photographer/jeweler who contact-printed 35mm work, put each print in
a big frame, each with an attached gooseneck magnifier.

Ridiculous question about small contact prints

MattKing

Moderator

waynecrider

Jim Jones

Sirius Glass

mdarnton

RobC

Sirius Glass

eddie

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

RobC

removed account4

Alabamacoffeebean

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

4season

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Alabamacoffeebean

Sirius Glass

removed account4

Lauris

Alan Gales

Sirius Glass

removed account4

ColinRH

Vaughn

DREW WILEY

Ridiculous question about small contact prints

Moderator

Membership Council

Membership Council

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency