Re: enlarging negative pinholes re:format

Having done both, my vote is clearly for contact 8x10. It depends, of
course, on the sharpness of the original image. A sharp 4x5 can enlarge
without losing much at all, while a fuzzy 8x10 negative is just that.
dragging around even a simple 8x10 pinhole camera with film holders,
changing bag, etc, can preocupy one. I did it for two weeks in ireland last
summer, but it was worth it for the half dozen great results. tray
developing 8x10 risks scratches. be very sure to cut your fingernails.
----- Original Message -----
From: "ragowaring" <ragowaring@btinternet.com>
To: <pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com>
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:04 AM
Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] enlarging negative pinholes re:format

> I am travelling in the summer and need to keep equipment down to a
minimum.
> I am considering building a 10 x 8 and 5 x 4 cameras. My question is:
>
> How does enlarged 5 x 4 negative pinhole photographs compare to contact
> printed 10 x 8 paper negatives?
>
> You see, the problem is where to go for negative film with all the storage
> and development headaches that go with it when away from a darkroom for
> weeks, or go for the easier but less sharp paper negative.
>
> And if I were to go for 10 x 8 negative film, how would that enlarge?
>
> Is it worth enlarging pinhole negatives or is it always better to contact
> print?
>
> This is mainly an aesthetic question based on practical considerations.
>
> I would very much appreciate some advise and imput - I am torn in two!
>
> Alexis
>
> _______________________________________________
> Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
> Pinhole-Discussion mailing list
> Pinhole-Discussion@pinhole.com
> unsubscribe or change your account at
> http://www.pinholevisions.org/discussion/
>
Received on Mon Apr 8 15:58:11 2002