Print size?

[gandolfi]

I sometimes wonder how big or how small prints other photographers make. I know it depends on motive - negative and so on.

In addition to this I have always been restricted by the sizes of my developing trays, which make prints larger than 50x70 cm problematic..

However, tonight I thought to He"" with it - I am not going to let that hinder me, so I have just made my biggest prints ever...

Messy, but rather addictive, I think.

Liquid emulsion on 600 grms paper - size of paper: 70x110 cm (ca 27,5x43,3").

what about you? how big do you go - and how do you print larger than large?

[markrewald]

I've taken delta 400, tmax 400 and hp5+ up 16x20. But you have to really enjoy the grain.

[wildbill]

usually 11x14, sometimes 16x20. I like sharp prints so much of the time bigger prints don't have the detail I'm looking for so I go only as big as I can. That was with a 4x5 enlarger. Now that I have my 10x10 set up I plan to do some larger work until I run out of money. I'm going to try doing them in my 3063 jobo drum and wallpaper trays. Washing becomes the issue so I may make one large tray from 1/4" ABS.

[tkamiya]

I can print up to 16x20.

Usually, I print 8x10 or 11x14. Anything larger, I'll have issues finding a place to display it. Also, being 35mm film user, I'll need to know I'm going to print BIG before I shoot so that I can choose an appropriate film. My practical limit is 11x14.

I do print small sometimes, usually on request.

[Ian Grant]

I've done the extremes printing 5"x4" smaller than the negatives by reduction (about 3" wide) and up to about 18ft wide, The larger images were using a commercial liquid emulsion designed specifically for spray application, it needed airline respiration and fume extraction, so not normal darkroom use.

These days I make a few exhibition images 20"x24 but if I had a specific project I'd go larger if it made sense for the project.

Ian

[eddie]

I have some trays for 32x40 inch prints. The trays are about 34.5x42.5 inches. They weren't cheap (about $125 each, when buying 6 at a time), but they work better than my old roll 'em method. Roll 'em works fine for RC, but is much more difficult with fiber. I also do some which are about 21x58 inches. I have no problem rolling them, even in fiber.

Emil- I'm still working on getting my liquid emulsion right, but the goal is very large prints.

[moki]

For regular prints from 35mm film, I use 13x18cm (5x7") and 30x40cm (12x16") for the very best ones.
The biggest one was a 50x50cm (20x20") from medium format film, but that's as far as I can go with 40x50cm trays. Moving the print evently all the time wasn't exactly easy, but in the end, it came out ok. I don't find this kind of size neccesary unless you actually present your work in a big gallery. What good is a 24x36" print when you put it in your living room and view it from from an arm's length away. I prefer a well-made 5x7" or 8x10" that you can hold in your hand and view up close.

[gandolfi]

I have some trays for 32x40 inch prints. The trays are about 34.5x42.5 inches. They weren't cheap (about $125 each, when buying 6 at a time), but they work better than my old roll 'em method. Roll 'em works fine for RC, but is much more difficult with fiber. I also do some which are about 21x58 inches. I have no problem rolling them, even in fiber.

Emil- I'm still working on getting my liquid emulsion right, but the goal is very large prints.

You can't (or I can't) make rolling development with liquid emulsion - and certainly not with 600grms paper...

We can get large trays for graphic purposes here in DK, but I think the price you payed for 6 would be less than the cost of one here....

Liquid emulsion ROCKS!

[cliveh]

I am quite fond of the old whole plate size, but with photography size does not really matter as you can print as small or as large as you like.

[eddie]

I got my trays here:
http://www.usplastic.com/catalog/ite...9664&catid=852