Your Typical Print Size

[Kvistgaard]

...as well as very arty and pretentious!

Agree! How about a small print in a small mount?

 

[Kvistgaard]

oh, and 8x10 is my preferred size, which I think strikes a good balance between size & cost. Children to feed, mortgage to pay etc etc.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

It is not uncommon for the model to be in the darkroom giving their interpretation of a final print, which often ends up hanging in their house.

Mick.

Watch it. That's how AA got in trouble.

 

[DWThomas]

My darkroom currently suffers from too much improvised stuff to deal with anything bigger than 11x14, but I think I have detected a slight trend toward "bigger is better" in some of the local shows. Even if I get the darkroom in shape, I've no plans to go beyand 16x20. I suspect, again based on recent experience, that the availability of fairly inexpensive ink-squirt printers that can do up around 13 x 19 inches may be influencing folks' expectations. Of retiree age and budget, I expect to the best of my ability to steer toward quality over quantity!

DaveT

 

[Chris Nielsen]

Hmmm. I have just discovered 2 important things: 1) My 35mm enlarger will only cover 12x16. 2) 16x20 trays are a b*tch in my bathroom darkroom and almost impossible to empty into the sink without getting solution everywhere, let alone a small bottle for use later!!!!

Wow 16x20 trays are monstrous!! 12x16 prints look cool though

 

[MattKing]

Ironically, my 16x20 trays are just about the only new photographic equipment that I've purchased recently.

I bought them to give myself 16x20 capability, and because I had the need to print a moderate quantity of 11x14s and 8x10s.

I had looked for used ones for a while, without success.

They are a very tight fit in my setup.

Matt

 

[MattKing]

Hmmm. I have just discovered 2 important things: 1) My 35mm enlarger will only cover 12x16. 2) 16x20 trays are a b*tch in my bathroom darkroom and almost impossible to empty into the sink without getting solution everywhere, let alone a small bottle for use later!!!!

Wow 16x20 trays are monstrous!! 12x16 prints look cool though

Chris - 16x20 trays work better in bathtubs.

Here is my setup, although these are my 11x14 trays (formerly cat litter pans):

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

I put the wash tray(s) on the floor of the tub.

Matt

 

[Chris Nielsen]

Pity I don't have a bath in the bathroom eh!!! Glass shower as well so I am sort of restricted with how I can set it up. I had to put the 4th tray in the shower and run that to wash my prints in the end but the other trays just fit snugly in the rest of the space, just a small gap to wheel my chair through to the enlarger

 

[Trond]

Metric sizes? I print mostly on 24x30 cm (9/12x12") paper.

Trond

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Metric sizes? I print mostly on 24x30 cm (9/12x12") paper.

Trond

Yes, I have a box in this size too. It's a nice format.

I learned my printing in the US and got used to 11x14, but I never understood why we don't have the same paper sizes around the globe, especially since they all in inches anyway. It is very hard to get 11x14 in Europe but no problem to get 9½x12 or 12x16. Then again, you can get 8x10 or 16x10 in the US and Europe. Puzzling!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I wish I could print larger, but ceiling height doesn't allow me to take the enlarger head much higher than covering a 9x12" print on 11x14 paper. The 9x12" size is nice in a way, because a 35mm enlargement looks good enough to me at that enlargment factor. So it's easy to get cohesive looking prints across formats.

With that said, though, if I could, I'd be churning out 12" square images for my serious work. Mostly from 120, some 4x5 (don't use that format anymore), but I would probably not enlarge 35mm that much.

 

[youngrichard]

Well I ticked the 20 x 16 box. Actually I always do contacts; weed out the obvious non-starters with the magnifying loupe and print the remainder on 5 x 7; of those I print some on 10 x 8, and if I still like them and think it's worth it go to 16 x 12 or 20 x16. Always borderless, can't bear not to use emulsion. Not many get to 20 x 16, but when they do..
Isn't that how everyone works?
Richard

 

[Ole]

24x30cm - also known as 9½x12".

¼ = [Alt]0188
½ = [Alt]0189
¾ = [Alt]0190

 

[Trond]

I think 24x30cm is a little too large for 35mm, so I will switch to 18x24cm paper when I get a new mask for my Versamask easel. I can't process prints larger than 24x30cm in my current bathroom-darkroom. Prints larger than that will have to wait until we get a house with room for a permanent darkroom (only a question of time!).

Trond

 

[rst]

... so I will switch to 18x24cm paper when I get a new mask for my Versamask easel. I

Ah yes, that I forgot, 12x16 is not only the larges size I can handle in my darkroom, it is also the largest size I can handle with the Versamask easel.

Cheers
Ruediger

 

[Jerevan]

I ticked the 8x10 box, but it really is 18x24 cm paper so the actual print size tends to be about 15x20 cm. I could do just about any size in the darkroom, but the economics puts my limit at 8x10 or 11x14 or the closest metric size. At these print sizes the ease of 35 mm film feels perfect for me. I've done mostly fibre but at the moment it's RC for an outdoors exhibition.

I've discovered that the beauty of the RC is that you can crank out a few work prints at 8x10 in a few minutes, giving a good work flow.

 

[catem]

Answering for what is 'normal' just now - Getting smaller all the time.

 

[Jim Chinn]

For enlarging mostly 8x10 and 11x14 for formats up to 4x5. I can go bigger but due to space restrictions it becomes much more of a hassle.

 

[DLawson]

Wow 16x20 trays are monstrous!!

When I got my first enlarger (in high school), I got a set of 16x20 trays because I was certain I was going to be printing huge things from my 35mm negatives.

I think I actually used them once, which let me find out how much solution I needed. After that, one of them has been used as the wash tray and that's it.

But once I get the darkroom framed and the 45M pieced together, who knows?

 

[ROL]

8x10 prints * I will do only if hot pokers threatened to eyes*

I'm with Bob here, though I'm not a commercial printer. 8X10 is for proofing and book scans.

When I commit to a "fine print", it's normally as an edition (or partial) including all commonly available sheet sizes: 11X14, 16X20, and 20X24 (the largest, typically). If the negative, subject matter, budget, and whim support it, I will get out the rolls and print 24X30 and 30X40 as well - so those may qualify as typical at those times. Because of the information rich nature of the vast majority of my negatives I find working a fine print at less than 16X20 to be problematic - though looking back through my cache of 11X14's, they can appear as "little jewels".

All done here, in one half of my 2 car garage:

 

[RalphLambrecht]

ROL

What a nice and orderly darkroom. Looks like a lot of fun to work in it!

 

[jovo]

What Ralph said!

 

[ROL]

What Ralph said!

Thanks. Looks orderly since not in use right this minute - and there is more space than equipment. One enlarger (cold light) and no processors (tray only), but 3(!) print washers (closeouts from Samys "digital makeover" several years ago).

 

[DAK]

My most frequently made print size is 6x9 on 8x10 paper. I checked 8x10. My largest prints are 9x9 or 8x12 on 11x14. I don't make many of those.
Dave

 

[kraker]

I voted 11x14 as a substitute for 12x16 (as mentioned in the first post). Yes, that's 30x40 cm.

And with that vote, I'm part of the big mass... 11x14 is in the lead.

Ralph, I didn't read all the posts, so maybe you've answered this already: why do you want to know? Something new and improved for the new edition?