8x20 & 16x20

[David Hedley]

I am a very keen LF photographer, but have never shot larger than 4x5.

I'm thinking about trying ULF, and wondering if a 16x20 camera exists, which would also be capable of shooting half frame 8x20, without complicated mechanical adjustment in the field?

[User Removed]

http://www.wisner.com/16x20.htm

I'm sure you could get a custom 8x10 reducing back made for it.

[David A. Goldfarb]

The easiest way to do it would be to use a half-frame darkslide mask like this one for 4x10 on an 8x10 camera--

http://www.benderphoto.com/4x10pa.htm

It's easy to make one yourself from a spare darkslide (or since the holders are custom anyway, you could have the holder manufacturer make one for you), is much less expensive than a reducing back, and you can keep it with you all the time without adding much weight to your kit. You'll want to be sure the camera has plenty of rise/fall to take full advantage of a half darkslide mask, since the image area is no longer centered in the back.

[George Losse]

I think in the long run an 8x20 camera would still be much lighter then a 16x20 with some kind of reducing back. You mentioned having the camera in the field. I would think weight and mobility should also be a consideration.

[Scott Peters]

I would recommend an 8 x 20 / and frankly an 8 x 10 (which can be nicely contact printed in and of itself, or enlarged should you choose to enlarge to 16 x 20. Get a 4 x 5 reducing back and you may never use your 4 x 5 again...

The stand alone 8 x 20 would be much more manageable in the field.

I regulary take a 7 x 17 and 8 x 10 with me. Some places I shoot just tend to lend themselves better to one format over the other.

[User Removed]

At $7,500.00, its a quite expensive camera to just "try out".

I think Scott makes a great point. You could get an 8x20 camera, which would be much easier to work with in the field, or just in general, and another 8x10 camera for making 16x20 enlargments.

What are you wanting a 16x20 negative for anyway? Regular silver printing, AZO, platinum? If it's just for making silver prints, doing a 4x enlargement from 8x10-16x20 is not a great loss of sharpness.

I've been recently doing some 30x40 mural prints from 8x10 negatives, and those are still VERY sharp. Probably the same as doing a 11x14 from a 4x5.

[Dave Wooten]

Clyde Butcher prints from 12 x 20 negs.

[jnanian]

tom yanul used to print from 12 x 20 too.
too bad he closed down his darkroom a while back ..

http://hometown.aol.com/%20yanulpan/lab.html

[David Hedley]

Interesting comments - thanks. I suppose the idea was to have one camera from which I could contact print, either in 16x20, or in 8x20 panoramic.

Something like a 5x7 Canham, with a 6x17 back, could be a more portable alternative, but you'd need to have an enormous enlarger.

I just wanted to get to a place where the negative was very close to the final print - something like a straight wire with gain.

[Dave Wooten]

Maybe a 14 x 17 camera with an additional 7 x 17 back/or you can also just tape down the loose side of 7 x 17 in your 14 x 17 camera...not a big deal really.

These cameras are made in China presently.