--- "Fox, Robert" <r...@aarp.org> wrote: [clip] > Are there any practical reasons to shoot at 4x5 rather than 8x10? I suppose > it would be easy enough to do both, but I'm wondering about people's > preferences for architectural and portrait work. The multi-format Zero2000 > looks like a good starter as well given the choice of formats for standard > roll film.
8X10 film is four times more expensive than 4X5 film (makes sense). The bulk of an 8X10 camera, along with the slide holders, make things much more difficult to work with. Then again, if you are going to use an alternative process to print, then you will probably want a larger negative to work with. I've got some examples at http://mywebpages.comcast.net/hmpi/Projects/BearSkins/BearSkins.htm if you would like to take a look. An alternative to regular 8X10 film is to use halftone film of that size, which costs considerably less. The image "Jimmy" (found at http://mywebpages.comcast.net/hmpi/Pinhole/Images/PinholeImages.htm) was made with this film. I would also direct you to the Pinhole FAQ located at http://mywebpages.comcast.net/hmpi/Pinhole/Articles/FAQ/pin_faq.htm. There you will find enough information to get you going in the right direction. Cheers - george ===== Handmade Photographic Images - http://GLSmyth.com DRiP Investing - http://DRiPInvesting.org __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
