11x14 enlarger/scanner

Discussion in 'Ultra Large Format Cameras and Accessories' started by bherg, Jun 6, 2006.

  1. bherg

    bherg Member

    Messages:
    89
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Location:
    sweden
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Hello....

    This is my first post on Apug.

    im currently using a 4x5 camera and seeking to upgrade to a larger format.

    At the moment im not seeking to contact print i want to enlarge and scan.

    So, im looking for a enlarger that can handle 11x14 negatives and a scanner. I want to be able to do really large prints if i want to, to have the ability. I have a bit tight with space, so i was thinking converting another camera with a cold light.

    Tried to get some answers on another forum, but didnt see that i got any replies that made me happy.

    Are 11x14 the wrong format for me? should i upgrade to 8x10? But i keep thinking bigger film will make bigger prints with high detail, ofcourse i wont make meter sized prints at my home, but i want to know that i can if i want to.

    Cheers Johannes from sweden.
     
  2. TheFlyingCamera

    TheFlyingCamera Membership Council Council

    Messages:
    9,546
    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Location:
    Washington DC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If you are looking to enlarge, either 5x7 or 8x10 would be your best bets. Larger than 8x10 and you will find the size of equipment needed will go up exponentially, as will the cost. The logistical hassles in enlarging from an 11x14 negative will also increase. That will basically require a glass negative carrier, and that much more attention to dust removal, since you will have that many more square inches to attract it.

    The same problems will occur with scanners. There are very few scanners out there which can handle bigger than 8x10 negatives, and they are ridiculously expensive.
     
  3. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    18,000
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    11x14" enlargers exist if you have the space (they are usually horizontal enlargers), and they can be constructed out of old process cameras and such, but 8x10" gives you a lot more options in terms of camera equipment, lenses, enlargers, film choices, filmholders, etc. I shoot 11x14" and I contact print that size.
     
  4. Ole

    Ole Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    9,281
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Location:
    Bergen, Norw
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    There's a lab in Stockholm (Forstöringsateljéen) which has enlarger capable of taking 20x24" negatives. I would leave the enlarging to them, and provide my very best contact print as a "model" of what I want for the final result.

    I have a 5x7" enlarger myself, but have no plans to ever aquire a larger one. 5x7" can be contact printed or enlarged and gives great prints both ways. 8x10" enlargers are just too big; anything bigger even more so.

    I've recently got hold of a 24x30cm plate camera, and have decided to drop 11x14" and bigger (30x40cm). The 24x30cm is close enough to 8x10" to be easily portable, and just enough bigger to make a great difference in contact prints!
     
  5. jd callow

    jd callow Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    8,003
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Milan
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If you wish to do very large enlargements from large negs you will need a great deal of room -- eventhough the negs are bigger the glass is longer so the distance between film and paper is greater.

    As others have stated 8x10 is probably a better way to go than 11x14. A 10x10 (for 8x10) enlarger is far more common then an enlarger for 11x14. If you wish to do big (really really big) prints you'll want a horizontal enlarger. A 10x10 vertical Durst needs about 10' and will give you a 30x40. A 10x10 horizontal durst will give you as big a print as you have tracks and wall space. A couple years ago I sold (not my enlarger simply the ebayer) a closed loop, fully automatic 10x10 Durst HL (Horizonal enlarger) with track, computer controller, lenses etc.. for about 3 or 4,000 USD. The enlarger new was about 150-175,000.00 and was in great shape.

    As for scanners the same is true. You can buy a very good 8x10 scanner with transparency adapter for about 2,000.00 or a decent one for about 800.00. A comparable XL scanner (Cero eversmart) will run about 6,000 used (15,000 to 30,000 new if they are still made) at the very good end or 2,000.00 new at the decent end.
     
  6. df cardwell

    df cardwell Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,341
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Location:
    Dearborn,Mic
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Besides being far less expensive, 8x10 wil prove more efficient than 11x14 to shoot, to enlarge, and to scan. To achieve a negative that is 1.4 times the size of 8x10, you will probably encounter 4x the (already considerable) expense.

    Finally, the cost to scan at greater detail than can be achieved by 4x5 will be exceedingly expensive.

    best of luck.
     
  7. Mike A

    Mike A Member

    Messages:
    324
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Location:
    Yorkville, I
    Shooter:
    ULarge Format
    Johannes, I've been shooting 11x14 for 2 years or so now. I contact print only, this is realistically your only option, which is fine for me. I look at my old enlargements and as allot of contact printers will tell you there is something intrinsically different in a contact print.

    On the flip side, I was interested in seeing what an optical enlargement from 11x14 looked like so I looked high and low for a lab that could create optical enlargements from 11x14 and found none. I would say go with 5x7 or 8x10 if you wish to make sizable enlargements.

    Mike
     
  8. resummerfield

    resummerfield Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,363
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Location:
    Alaska
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    As almost everyone else has advised, if you want to enlarge, stay with 8x10. I enlarge 8x10, and the prints (up to around 3x) are gorgeous! And doing your own enlarging is much more affordable than having a commercial lab do it. But if you do want prints larger than 24x30 or so, then Ole has the best suggestion….send them to that lab in Stockholm (Forstöringsateljéen).
     
  9. Curt

    Curt Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,560
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Location:
    Pacific Nort
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi Johannes,

    If you have the time, the space, and the money, then the desire is all that's left. There are people who buy big 4x4's with huge engines and only drive them to work on city streets. If it makes you happy and you can handle all that goes along with it then go for it.

    I think what most of us here would say is that the largest negative we would want to enlarge is in the 8x10 inch range. But if you need billboard size then that's a good reason. I myself don't have the money to buy the equipment or the space needed. Anyone shooting 11x14 already has the taking equipment and a larger lens can certainly be had, but the enlarger would surely have to be a horizontal and then there is the space needed for projection. A lot to consider. It sounds ambitious, let us know what turns out.

    Best Luck,

    Curt
     
  10. df cardwell

    df cardwell Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,341
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Location:
    Dearborn,Mic
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The first portrait I shot in 11x14 was lovely.

    The family ordered lots of extra prints.... wallets.

    d
     
  11. ZorkiKat

    ZorkiKat Member

    Messages:
    346
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Location:
    Manila PHILI
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    <LOL>!

    My first 4x5 was a portrait too. My "test" subject also wanted nothing but wallet prints..
     
  12. Brook

    Brook Member

    Messages:
    94
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format

    What we need is clients with 11x14 wallets.
     
  13. Bob Carnie

    Bob Carnie Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,543
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    Toronto-Onta
    Shooter:
    Med. Format RF
    Mike
    I have a 11x14 Deveere Enlarger set up in my darkroom that I use for 8x10 but also could do 11x14 negatives. In fact my wishlist includes a 11x14 camera to take full advantage of this enlarger.
    Not many around as you say, mine is in *new condition* one of the best gifts given to me by a larger sister lab when they went fully digital.
     
  14. bherg

    bherg Member

    Messages:
    89
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Location:
    sweden
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Sounds like i have to think this over, but leaving the printing to "förstorningsatteljen" sounds like a good idea and leave them a good contact print as "model".

    But the scanning bit sounds dull, anyway. Going to think about this.

    I was veiwing a Webpage by a german artist that had portraits printed on cloth that sized 20x60 feet, but that big make the viewing distance is far far away from the actual enlargment. ( www.helnwein.com ) click on photography.

    My only concerns so far is wheight of camera, i would like a wooden one, so thats kinda heavy. And the scanning part.


    Cheers Johannes from sweden.
     
  15. Jim Jones

    Jim Jones Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,452
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Location:
    Rural NW MO
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Johannes -- I hate to mention this in an analog forum, but scanning the negative, not an enlargement, may be the most practical. A film scanner that permits quite large prints from 4x5 is less expensive than most large format film equipment, and requires little space. Consider the Epson Perfection V700 Photo or Epson Perfection V750-M PRO.
     
  16. tomf24

    tomf24 Member

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I actually built an 11x14 enlarger (from a horizontle camera) for a friend. So, I've gotten to enlarge and print from both 8x10 and 11x14 negs. My impression..... there is no advantage to enlarging from anything larger than 8x10. I don't know if this is due to film flatness or the quality of the taking lenses. I love the 11x14 for alt contact prints, but I will use 4x5 and 8x10 for enlargements.
     
  17. SusanK

    SusanK Member

    Messages:
    215
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I am considering the purchase of one of these two scanners. I will be scanning 120 and 4x5 film. Can someone tell me what the difference is between the two.... Dmax, dual lenses, resolution appear to be equal between the two. Is the only difference the Pro's ability to do "wet" scans??? I'm not keen on the idea of wetting down a neg. for scanning... some of my negs are "singles", made back in the day when I was too stupid to make two exposures, or when the second frame was exposed incorrectly.

    Susan
     
  18. PHOTOTONE

    PHOTOTONE Member

    Messages:
    2,411
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Location:
    Van Buren, A
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    One could actually scan an 11x14 negative in sections and stitch it together in photoshop, just like a panoramic multi-part scan. I have scanned 16x20 prints of images I could not find the negative for. If the flatbed scanner has a transparency lid (light in lid) then it can be done. One could also put the larger than 8x10 negative on a light box (masking around it) and then scan it with a scanning back on a 4x5 camera. These scanning backs are not cheap though.
     
  19. Donald Miller

    Donald Miller Member

    Messages:
    6,242
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Durst Pro has a couple of large enlargers on Ebay now. One of them is a 12X16 vertical. It will make the camera and lenses look cheap in comparison.
     
  20. SusanK

    SusanK Member

    Messages:
    215
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    scratches & pits in glass....

    Just received my V750-M from Calumet. Set everything up and am playing with negative scanning today (just posted "Driftwood - 3" for your comments). Scanner glass looked perfect until the transparency light came on... then I noticed an inch long scratch and a couple of pits in the glass of the non-lid part. Is this normal (I think not)....? For $750 I'd like the glass to be perfect.

    Call calumet and exchange it for another scanner....????

    susan