Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,862   Posts: 1,583,180   Online: 698
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26
  1. #21
    donbga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Shooter
    Large Format Pan
    Posts
    2,084
    Quote Originally Posted by melmoth
    Hallo,


    How big can a print be blown up to without losing too much in the grain?

    Assuming that the camera lens and enlarger lens are of good quality, one has a fast/slow film and that effect wanted is defined by clarity and not grain the size of golf balls.....

    Again, very curious and most grateful for any input.

    M.
    I;ve made 16x20 enlargements from Ilford 400 Delta and the grain wasn't objectionable. However these were images with a lot of detail and little con tone areas like sky areas.

    Don Bryant

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    923
    My favoured print size is 11x14. The handful I have from 35mm are on APX 25 but then again my photographs often contain sky.
    Mark
    Mark Layne
    Nova Scotia
    and Barbados

  3. #23
    gnashings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,376
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by gnashings
    Along with all the great and very objective comments alreadyon record - I have a thught:

    paper is (relatively) cheap - go nuts! Then look for yourself, see how you like it.

    A little off topic... I wonder how much effect the enlarger lens has on this?

    Peter.
    and apparently I can not spell... sorry about that - just noticed.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Denver
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    62
    I've been happy with 16x20 prints from 35mm, when I've shot TMax 100. That takes care of the grain problem (skies still have noticeable grain but not distracting IMO). I had one print that at least one person couldn't believe was from 35mm, doing the following:

    use a tripod
    use a sharp lens (my Minolta MF primes are sharp at 16x20; my cheap Vivitar zoom is mushy at 8x10)
    shoot moderately stopped down (e.g. f8 on my 28mm f/2.8 is sharp as a tack)
    shoot at night and underdevelop (black skies don't show as much grain, underdeveloping seems to minimize grain also)

    That basically echos some previous posts I guess. All of that maximizes sharpness and minimizes grain, but still doesn't address the tonality issue (I wouldn't compare 16x20s from 35mm to those made from 4x5).

  5. #25
    Will S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    714
    Images
    34
    If you are interested in exploring this topic further I would recommend that you read this: http://www.imx.nl/photosite/technical/bwstateofart.html

    I think he covers it nicely. At least for my neophyte understanding of the subject.

    Best,

    Will
    "I am an anarchist." - HCB
    "I wanna be anarchist." - JR

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ireland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    59
    Thanks folks. Much appreciated. M.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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