Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Leslie E. England wrote: >>> I was under the impression exhibitions demanded 16x20 enlargements. > Having just bought a new easel and spent the extra money for the 16x20 size in case it ever comes up, I was curious. Is 16x20 a preference by galleries and not a demand? Is the decision the photographer's? Why 16x20, anyway? <<<<< Hi Lee, I don't think the gallery has any call on the print size, I imagine some do, but any exhibitions I've had or where my work was hung in a collection with other photographers, the size was the prerogative of the photographer. As far as 16X20 size? .... it may have something to do with the size of paper available to printing the full uncropped 35mm frame. I'm sure your money for the 16X20 easel is well spent as they rarely wear out and who knows someday your work maybe in high demand, if it isn't already, and hopefully you'll wear it out filling the orders for prints. :-) >>>Is Salgado allowed to pick his own size because of his fame? Is he saying his Leitz lenses and TriX won't stand a 16x20 enlargement? <<<<< He probably prints any size he wishes as many others do. As far as Leica created negatives not standing up to a 16X20 enlargement they surely do that very well. Either from colour / B&W negs or slides. They'll stand up to 30-40 inches without a problem and much larger. There's a medical complex in Phoenix, Arizona where images from my book on the medical profession hang in their board room, the prints were made from Tmax 35mm rated at 800, developed in Tmax developer 6 minutes at 75 degrees. All shot by available existing light and the prints are measured in feet, like 5' X 5' and bigger not inches. It's just breathe taking to walk in there and see them on the wall displayed at such a size.. What some folks don't understand is, the larger the blow-up, the greater distance you view it from. The enlargement size dictates the viewing distance and in the case of the board room it's extremely large, therefore the viewing distance to print size is part of the magic of making them look good.. Obviously if you make a 35mm print 4 feet by 8 feet you are going to need to stand back the proportionate distance to view it correctly. Will you see grain? Most certainly if you stand a foot or two away, common sense dictates that. However stand back the correct distance and the print looks gorgeous, or at least it should. >>If you thought a potential shot might be in an exhibition one day should you > pull out a Rollei?<<<<<< I suppose some think that way, but if that were the case would Salgado or HCB each time they shot some thing they felt would be an exhibition situation, have used a camera of larger format than a Leica? Besides you really don't think that way when shooting as a photojournalist. Possibly if one is shooting fine art material like rocks, ferns and non-breathing things with peeling paint, then they might believe every shot has potential for an exhibition and would be shooting with that in mind. Ergo, larger format or extremely slow film if using 35mm. Whereas the photojournalist / documentary photographer is concentrating on the moment of life he or she is hopefully capturing on film and not future exhibitions. I hope this answers some of your questions. ted Ted Grant Photography Limited www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html