Re: [Leica] Putting Barnack's Philosophy to the Test: Small Negative, Large Print

[Alastair Firkin <firkin@ncable.net.au>]

I have gone to 20 x 24 now on two occasions, skipping 16 x 20 because 
it would have "wasted" chemicals in the jobo 3000 drum ;-) The results 
were great, but handling big sheets of paper is hard, especially colour 
sheets with no red light available ;-)

Cheers

On Wednesday, Jul 2, 2003, at 03:46 Australia/Melbourne, Greg J. 
Lorenzo wrote:

> After more than a week's worth of doing nothing but sort massive 
> amounts of paper for my tax year end I finally got back into the 
> darkroom late last night to put Barnack's Philosophy of "small 
> negative, large print" to the test by doing a number of 16X20 prints. 
> This required that I extend the column on my V35 to it's maximum 
> setting and print without an easel. While I have done 16X20 prints 
> before, when testing equipment, I cheated somewhat by using paper no 
> larger than 8X10 or 11X14 and used test negatives supplied by Leica.
>
> Well I must say I am extremely pleased with the result. I enlarged B&W 
> 35mm negatives which had been created hand held at f stops of 5.6 to 
> 11 and shutter speeds from 1/250 to 1/60 using either an M2 or M3.
>
> To go beyond 16X20 I will need to reverse the head on the V35 and 
> print on the floor but I wondering what is the large print limit 
> people have seen from their Leica cameras?
>
> It seems Barnack was right!
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>
Alastair

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html