Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,752   Posts: 1,515,883   Online: 1007
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    468
    I personally prefer small prints.

    Most of my work is printed on 8x10 paper. (7x9 or 6x8 usually) I like to have some border.

    While I have printed large prints before, I just like the intimacy of a small print. Something you can hold in your hands and have just for yourself.

    joe

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    284
    I've been enlarging 35mm lately and using 5x7 often due to it fitting the 35mm format better for my work than the 8x10 I usually had used which sometimes was a bit too large for my taste.
    "Where is beauty? Where I must will with my whole Will; where I will love and perish, that an image may not remain merely an image."

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,042
    Until recently I was only printing up to 8x10 but have now returned where I can to A4 when I print on RC. This allows me to print full frame 35mm when I wish and size the paper post printing without the picture being too small for my liking.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,576
    Images
    27
    This is a subject that comes around once and a while..I ask a like question with a poll, I think, soon after finding this site - What I found then was bigger is not always better..it did take a while. I printed some 16x20's and aside from the fact it takes a great deal of chemistry, and there is barely enough room for the trays in my sink - had to place a holding tray outside the sink...the prints did not grab me any more than the 11x14's did. Now since that time, have moved up to 5x7 and shoot more 4x5, but find that 8x10 and 11x14 fit very well with the work I do. Still prefer a 16x20 mat, but the smaller prints tend to pull you in and ask the viewer to look closer at the work - IMO.

    YMMV..but print what looks good to you, try something big..but remember does it look good because it is, or does it just look big?
    Mike C

    Rambles

  5. #15
    jovo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,077
    Images
    188
    For a long time I was more than happy with well made 8x10s when mounted in 16x20 mats that were veritcal and offered landscape or portrait openings. They looked very elegant that way on the wall...all hung at the same height. But then I moved on to 11x14's and make almost everything that way. I've recently bought a 16x20 easel to make some of those mostly because (like so many who move from 4x5 to 8x10 negatives) there's a strong attraction to the detail and 'presence' the larger photograph can, uniquely, have. However, I haven't made one yet so I don't actually know what I'll think when I do. One thing is certain....mounting the sucker is going to be a helluva lot more expensive than anything smaller.
    John Voss

    My Blog

  6. #16
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by photomc
    YMMV..but print what looks good to you, try something big..but remember does it look good because it is, or does it just look big?
    I have seen prints where I think the photographer thought "it will be a good print if I make it bigger". Content matters.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  7. #17
    rbarker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rio Rancho, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,222
    Images
    2
    To paraphrase the discussion about tonal range within a print, I'll print it any darned size I want, and who are they to say what size it should be!

    Or, more seriously, I seldom print anything smaller than 8x10 or larger than 11x14. I have a few negatives that have been asking me to print them larger, but I've resisted, just to see if they are serious.
    [COLOR=SlateGray]"You can't depend on your eyes if your imagination is out of focus." -Mark Twain[/COLOR]

    Ralph Barker
    Rio Rancho, NM

  8. #18
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,001
    Images
    117
    My negs tend to be shy and would be quite pleased never to see enlargement. I think its a matter of tough love to force them exposed and fully enlarged in to public view.

    *

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,231
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by mrcallow
    My negs tend to be shy and would be quite pleased never to see enlargement. I think its a matter of tough love to force them exposed and fully enlarged in to public view.
    That almost sounds rude
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  10. #20
    SLNestler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Coral Springs, FL
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by mark
    It is not the size it is how you use what you got.....SOmeone had to say it.

    I think the subject dictates the size. A 30x40 print of an intimate scene would just not work in my book. and some grand landscapes work best at 5x7.
    I agree with Mark; at least in the photographic realm.
    I find that some of my more expansive views look too "precious" when printed small, and that some intimate closeups would look gross it greatly enlarged.
    At this point in my life, I print from 8X10 to 16X20. I believe the right image in 16X20 can still have intimacy.

    Of course, here in Florida, the market leader prints everything 10 feet long, and when I have a show, there's always someone who wants to tell me about his "fabulous prints." Another one of the mysteries of life; like how someone who takes 3 hours to watch 60 Minutes gets to be the President.
    Steven Nestler
    http://stevennestler.com

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin