Hello John, >From what I've observed, it seems a bit more like the balloon concept. Before you blow up a balloon, the color is quite rich and dark. The more air you put in (enlarge), the color gets thinner. I would suspect that the same holds true to some degree with enlarging. Because you are not enlarging the big negative as much, it would appear a bit richer than the small negative. This is just an observation, rather than a known fact.
-- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, December 28, 2003, 9:47:14 AM, you wrote: >> >> Hello Ryan, >> >> If I'm understanding you, you are curious to know at what size moving >> to Medium or Large format is noticeable compared to 35mm film. Before >> I made the move to Pentax 67, I wondered the same thing. After making >> the move, and shooting a couple of hundred rolls of MF film, I can >> tell you that you can see the difference in a 4X5 print. At that >> small size, the difference you see is mostly a tonal one. JF> I'm not for one moment trying to suggest this isn't true - I've heard JF> the some thing said many times before. I can only assume that this is JF> either because there is some significant difference between the film JF> emulsions sold (under the same names) as 35mm and medium format film, JF> or because the tone of the image changes as you change the enlargement. JF> Any suggestions as to which is the actual reason?
