Very true, very true...
Originally Posted by Suzanne Revy
I let the subject matter (or the client) determine the final print size, but I don't make huge prints from tiny negatives. I really like 8X8 inch prints from medium format (6X6) film, but wedding and portrait customers want 8X10 (or 10X10), so that's what I make.
Not quite on topic, but funny:
I was showing a digital shooter some B&W prints recently. The images were shot on 35mm Tri-X, processed in Rodinal - you can see what's coming...
He commented to me "There's a lot of noise in the sky here, you need to get a higher megapixel camera if you want to make 8X10 prints"
He had NO idea of the concept of "grain".
Some people are like Slinkies. They're really good for nothing, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.
I agree with Bob. The final size of the print depends upon the subject. It also depends upon what the artist is trying to achieve. There are some shots that demand huge prints. I doubt that Adams' "Clearing Storm" shot would look as good on 8x10 or 4x5. On the other hand, I saw Kertesz's "Chez Mondrian" shot and it's approcimately 8x10, possibly smaller, and it would look out of place in 20x24.
Originally Posted by bobfowler
For my own work I generally prefer print in a 10"h[horizonal] x 10" - 13"v[vertical], but there are times a composition seems better at a different size, (larger or smaller). A few of my slot canyon images I prefer at 19"h x 22"v. Generally, I feel the smaller an image is printed, the less complicated and busy the composition should be... again, in general, as I reserve the right to change my mind at any given moment for no apparent reason...
National Sarcasm Society
(like we need your support)
I don't think that there is anything inherently wrong with "LARGE." But I do think that a perfect print is more important than a LARGE print.
Personally, I have no suitable space to display LARGE prints. I live in a small house filled with books. Art has to fit the space or remain unhung. 20x24 is the abolutely largest space that I have.
Recently I bought one of Alex Hawley's prints. I was skeptical at first about the 13x15 matte, but now I really love the size.
I just got off the phone with a friend who just sold a 15x15 and then sold another one to a banker who wants it 20x20 to put behind his desk.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I agree with Ceratto the smaller the image lighter should be the composition.
I mostly contact print and I got some negative I keep for enlargement as they're is to much information for the size and this information can be revealed tby the enlargement.
I shoot with slower speed films, typically and print usually 8x8 or 10x10's, using 2 1/4 negs... My girlfriend has been known to shoot Delta 3200, 135 and enlarge to 11x14... The grain enlarged that much gives off a sketched look that I think is facsinating with the subject matter...
I like the consensus that it depends on the image and the finished product.. Its unfortunate that some spaces are designed solely for the display of large work...
Large is impressive on initial inspection. But, with time, LARGE IS LIKE SOMEONE TALKING TOO LOUD TOO OFTEN. Kinda gets on your nerves.
I like the intimacy of photographs. Smaller pictures are inviting, big ones make you stand back too far.
I don't really see this as an issue of postmodernism, though there are photographers like Gursky and Struth who have other reasons to be thought of as postmodern printing big. I think for them size is more about competing with painting on museum and gallery walls than it is about, say, skepticism about the validity of all metanarratives. And even Ansel printed bigger and bigger as he became more famous.
Originally Posted by jmdavis
Personally, I don't print large. I like the look of a contact print, and printing artifacts become a distraction to me at around 4x. I tend to print 35mm to about 6x8" and most other formats no larger than 11x14". Occasionally I'll do a 16x20" or 20x24", but not that often.
So funny! Thanks Bob!
Originally Posted by bobfowler