That doesn't sound like a very practical solution to me. You have to change the negative and precisely shift the paper on the baseboard 36 times for each roll of film without making a mistake. Have fun with that! And we haven't even begun to take all the other aspects of processing that need to be addressed. The way I see it, 16x20 paper is really the smallest practical size for this. Anything smaller and you're not gaining much in size for each frame. Have you priced out 16x20 paper lately? It's not inexpensive. It's downright pricey as paper goes. Then you need big trays and large volumes of chemistry to process said paper. It's OK if you're already set up to make prints that large and do so regularly, or if you have the scratch to build out a setup that large. It's not a practical solution for the home hobbyist on a budget. So what's wrong with making a contact printed proof sheet on 8x10 or 8 1/2x11 paper and examining the frames with a good magnifier? You buy the magnifier once and have it for a lifetime. Heck, I contend that the home hobbyist would have and easier and far less expensive time simply making 4x6 inch proof prints.
Originally Posted by pnance