More panoramic action.

[alexn]

Agreed...

When I was considering formats to start shooting film, I got an A3 sheet of paper and drew all the format sizes so I could visually see them side by side to get an idea of how big and small formats were.... I came from a DX DSLR, with a 18x24mm sensor.. Seeing that next to 35mm, then that next to a 6x7cm makes DSLR look ridiculous.. Then the 6x7cm next to 6x17cm and 4x5in... same again, the 6x7 looks like a dinky toy negative.. Then seeing how small 4x5" and 8x10" (Which look massive next to other formats) look next to 7x17".

That instantly made me want to shoot 7x17"... I would still love the opportunity to shoot it at some stage but I think I'll master my 4x5 and 6x17 for the time being then look at getting into ULF as a side pursuit... I would really love to do 7x17" contact prints with Illford FP4+ or Delta 100... It would be incredible to be able to take one into some of Queenslands beautiful national parks... I think ULF waterfall images are breathtaking.

[jars121]

You can contact print a 7x17 negative?! That is one large enlarger!

[alexn]

I wouldnt use an enlarger, rather just pressing the negative, emulsion side down against the light sensitive paper and exposing it to light, then developing the print paper...

You could make a custom printing frame and darkroom easel to hold the frame, neg and paper pressed together, and then expose the whole shebang to light.. I have never contact printed myself, but I do understand from what I've read that an enlarger would not be necessary. I have also heard of people doing contact prints from 16x20 negs and larger.

[jars121]

Sorry I completely misread the above. 7x17 would be very manageable with an enlarger, depending on the enlarging lens/distance between the baseboard and the lens. I've never contacted printed either, so whether or not its best to use an enlarger or not, I have no idea.

[alexn]

Contact printing generally doesn't use the enlarger at all, as you are not enlarging the image. You are basically making an inverse copy of the negative onto paper, or a paper positive. You sandwich the neg emulsion side down to the paper inside a contact printing frame, then place the frame face down (negative side down) over a diffused light source much light a light table in design.. I would think you would make this light box very uniformly lit so be sure of even exposure. Then from what I read, you turn on the light box for a few seconds then turn it off, separate your frame/neg/paper, put the paper into either a tray or a daylight print developing tank and develop your print. The prints generally hold as much fine detail as the original negative which is amazing to view over the print with a magnifying glass.. As I understand you lose dynamic range, dodging and burning can be done during exposing but I would imagine it would be difficult to get it right... deep shadow detail is usually lost (from what I read).

I would love to hear from Walter on this topic as he's a big fan of the contact print..

[jars121]

That's exactly as I understood Alex. I only have (limited) experience with 35mm contact printing, which uses the enlargers light source, as it provides even light distribution across the entire surface. I'd love to hear from Walter as well, I'm intrigued by contact printing.

[Lachlan717]

Hey Lachlan, any chance you could upload a pic of one of your 7x17 slides on a light box or similar? I'd love to see what it looks like!

Right; as promised. Here is the comparison. BTW, I had trouble getting a decent shot of the light table due to the frequency flicker of the fluro tubes, and the right hand side of the 7x17 film has come up dark. But, I think that you'll get the idea!

[jars121]

Good lord that's amazing. Thanks mate!

[alexn]

Un... Believable

[Lachlan717]

Good lord that's amazing. Thanks mate!

Sorry it's such a shite quality image.

Un... Believable

Have I got you looking forward to me winning Powerball? Can you imagine this in Vevia?!??!?!