Switch to 5x7

[bobby_cranford]

I wanted to solicit some comments on switching to large format from

medium format. I have been shooting B&W with 6x6 for the last 2

years. Quality is good, but the lure of movements and individual

control over each sheet of film is tempting. I do not normally

enlarge past 11x14. Most of my pictures are 8x10 or 8x8 in square.

If I switch, I am considering just contact printing.

 

I am looking for comments from those that have made 5x7 contacts.

Have you been satisfied with the results as far as size is concerned

or would you prefer larger? I realize the subject matter can dictate

this decision. The pictures I enjoy the most are those that extract

some detail out of the scene like a single tree in a landscape or a

portion of an interesting brick wall. I have taken some of my prints

and put them in a 5x7 mat to get a feeling for the size. Holding

them up against the wall, I find that landscapes get lost, but the

detail type shot works for me. It kind of asks you to come closer

and take a look. The reason for the large format thinking, is when

you come in for the closer look, the overall detail of the print

would very high because of contact print.

 

This is a meandering train of thought, but I would like some comments

from anyone who does (or did do) 5x7 contacts and the impressions

from them. I think they would be fun to make, intimate to view and

not overwhelming on a wall or in an album.

[qtluong]

I find it really nice to handle a portfolio of 5x7, but

it's a bit small for the wall (I prefer 20x30 :-)). I found

it difficult to get great color contacts (and generally

ilfochromes), so I quit making them and five years ago jumped

to digital printing, but at 5x7 there is a lot of difference

between a contact and a digital print.

[ed b.]

I like the aspect ratio of 5x7, but find 8x10 much more rewarding to contact print.

[ole_tjugen]

5x7" is a good compromise between the size of 8x10" and the portability of 4x5". The size is sufficient to make good contact prints, while not so large you really need a car and two assistants to move it...

 

While the size is smallish for landscapes, I agree that it's great for detail shots.

[roger_urban3]

It's all subjective.

 

I ditto the comments from the above posters, but especially Ed Buffaloe.

 

5x7 is actually my preferred LF format, with 8x10 a close second. There's more film real estate, vs 4x5. More flexibility with lens choices, considering you have a 4x5 reducing back handy. A 5x7 bellows gives you more draw for longer lenses, and more movements, at least on my Wisners.

 

http://www.freestylesales.com has reasonably priced sheet film, but occassionally you can find deals on Ebay.

[jason_greenberg_motamedi]

I agree with you that "...landscapes get lost, but the detail type shot works..." I love the format but I almost always enlarge. However, I like 5x7 contacts for portraits.

[nick_morris]

I am just beginning to work with 8x10, after using a 4x5 for about five years. I've bought 100 sheets of 8x10 film, and I plan to spend this year trying it on for size. I have never used a 5x7, but I like the format-aspect.

I've only used the 8x10 a little, less than 20 exposures. I like using the 8x10, but...8x10 is a lot more cumbersome than 4x5; and a lot more expensive in every way, cameras, lenses, film, use of chemicals (and I'm on a limited budget). An enlarger is out of the question (space as well as money the issue). My 135mm WF Ektar lens for my 4x5 cost me about $250, a comparable 250mm WF Ektar for my 8x10 seems to run about 2 1/2 to 3 times that. I have yet to make a good negative or print, but there is something about using the 8x10 that I can't really describe. The potential feels like its there. I get the sense that if I can manage to get the results, it will be my primary tool for photography.

Since I have a 4x5 enlarger, I have given some thought to a 5x7 with an additional 4x5 back. The 4x5 back will allow for 8x10, 11x14, and so on enlargements; the 5x7, more personal contact prints. I would have the choice aspects. But like I said, I've got 100 sheets of 8x10 film. Seems to me the only way to discover what I can do with it, and what it will do for me.

[rayfc]

I too am entering LF after several decades of MF. I initially considered 5x7 or

8x10 because I was lured by the thought of contact prints. After investigating

the matter, I decided to go with 4x5. I'm having a great time learning so many

things. Simple use of the camera is a totally different experience than

anything I've ever done before. There is a lot to learn. On top of that comes

the darkroom work. How do you plan to develop; tray, tank, drum???

Assuming you settle on a method, you'll need to develop your technique.

Don't forget that you need to test your camera and development technique as

a combined entity.

 

I've had my camera just over a week. So far, I've shot and processed over 40

sheets and all I've done is various exposure and processing experimentation.

I probably have another 40 or 50 tests to go before I'd feel confident enough

to actually go on a shooting expedition with the intent of capturing some "real"

images.

 

Now to make my point... 4x5 is relatively cheap compared to 5x7 or 8x10 and

I'm glad that my learning curve is taking place on the 4x5 track. One day, I

might jump into larger format but, doing so will not obviate the need for my

4x5 stuff any more than going to 4x5 did my MF and 35mm stuff.

 

Last, as I just found-out tonight, the image quality of a printed 4x5 is

outstanding. Not long ago, I bought one of the old Omega D2 enlargers. It

was very cheap and turned-out to be in very good condition. I spent a couple

hours cleaning it up and aligning it and made my first print tonight; a full neg

image on 11x14 paper. Edge-to-edge sharpness (due to a good Rodenstock

enlarging lens and a properly aligned enlarger) is out of this world. The tones

are outstanding!

 

Anyhow, don't dismiss 4x5 too quickly. Perhaps you could borrow some 4x5

equipment and at least perform the most expensive part of the learning curve,

on a format that is easier on the pocket book...

 

Just a thought...

 

Regards

[john_porter1]

For the past two months I have been shooting 5x7 and found it to be just what I was looking for. The negs are huge and making proofs or contact prints is fairly easy. However I have found that the contact prints leave much to be desired. Burning and dodging are rather difficult because you can not see the image reflecting off of your burn sheet I'm sure you could burn with a little flash light while the regular exposure was being made so you can see what you are doing but it just seems to hard to things accurate when everything is that small. I never found a thread on burning and dodging contact prints. I found the contacts very nice but I wanted them at least 8x10 or 11x14. For the past month I have been searching for a 5x7 enlarger at a good price. I found a Omega E5 5x7 enlarger for $450 with coldlight head and condensor head and lens and everything else I need. I would say that you will have fun with the contact prints for a little while but you will desire to print them bigger. Lots of times its better to start out with just the basics (contact printing) to build the desire to enlarge. My desire was huge I was consantly searching the internet for a good 5x7 enlarger and it paid off! Good Luck

[jnanian]

hi bobby

 

i have been shooting portraits and architectural "stuff" using 5x7,

for a few years - it is a great format. i was a convert from 4x5.

while it isn't as large as a ulf or 8x10, a 5x7 contact printed on

11x14 paper looks really nice, hand stitched books and albums

with 5x7 contacts look nice too. it is small and intimate, but

sometimes it is as nice to look at an image up close and take it

in, as it is to be bowled-over by one from across the room.

 

speaking of my own experience, i kind of wish i had an 8x10

camera with a reducing back, rather than a camera that shoots

strictly 5x7 film. it is mostly because i have been buying long

8x10 lenses, and unfortunately they are usually too large for a

4x4" lensboard and require a "lens mount " to be custom made

by steve grimes.

 

if you decide later that you want to make larger prints, enlargers

for 5x7 aren't too-too expensive. if you find that you want to

enlarge the negative, you can probably find a used omega, built

like a tank, for not too much money. ( as john p. said)

 

good luck with your decision

 

john

[brian_ellis3]

I tried 5x7 several years ago. If I owned a 5x7 enlarger I probably would have stayed with it because it's a very nice aspect ratio. However, I found that contact prints generally tended to be too small for my tastes. There were a few images with which it worked very well but with many others it didn't. I was stuck with having to contact print all of them whether the size seemed right for a given image or not because I don't have a 5x7 enlarger. For me, 8x10 is a more suitable format when I'm limited to contact printing only.

[ronald_lamarsh1]

I just had to weigh in on this. I have both a 5x7 and 4x5 and find 5x7 the perfect aspect ratio for the way that I see. I agree it maybe a little small for some types of shots but its really rather subjective. Developed in pyro hp5+ gives stunning contact prints with little to no dodging or burning required. I have done wider landscapes and find them just as pleasing as more intimate images. Its also quite good for architecture as the extra film hieght on a vertical shot lets you include taller objects. 5x7 enlargers are big and too big for my rather meager darkroom.

[e._grim]

I recently switched from med. format (TLR) to 5X7. I too use B&W film, and mostly made 5X5 prints for mounting in an album, not larger prints for framing.

 

Having used up 50 sheets of film, I am pleased with contact prints. However, as I have had the camera only for a couple of months, I have been doing tests and portraits - no landscapes - so you may be right. Nevertheless I am looking forward to better weather (my location: Spokane) so I can get out and photograph some historic architecture and landscapes. I expect to be pleased with contact prints of those subjects too.

 

My used Gandolfi came with a 4X5 reducing back; that should be handy if I decide I need enlargments (or enlarged negatives) as 4X5 enlargers are more common than used 5X7 enlargers. The community college where I do darkroom work has 4X5 enlargers, for example, but no 5X7 enlarger.

 

So far I have not found it necessary to do any dodging & burning. I intend to start making prints using alternative processes, which may decrease the difficulty of dodging as exposure times are so much longer. At any rate I'm not worried about it.

 

You didn't ask, but I would like to mention that I was slightly concerned about the difficulty of developing sheet film. I have had no problems developing HP5+ in trays (in ID-11). No scratches, and no other problems.

 

Good luck.