Can you print large size pictures from a 35mm SLR camera?

Question

Are you restricted to 4x6" prints with normal SLRs?

Answer 1

I have made 8x10 prints and they looked OK. Anything bigger begins to show distortion. Leave you negatives together as you receive them and take a strip down to Wal-Mart or a Photo Shop and let them do an 8x10 and you will see how it do. Last I did it cost around $5.

Answer 2

35mm is not the "Holy Grail" of image quality for film photography. There is a technology older than 35mm film that is far better in quality - medium format - think Hasselblad, Mamiya, Yashica, etc. Medium format is better qualty than 35mm because the negatives are much larger - about 2" x2" - I could stand corrected on this as I'm not that familiar with Medium format. If your mom or grandma had a Brownie - that was medium format. Large format - often used for architectural photography has even better image quality. Anyone who attempts to compare film and digital from a quality perspective is out of perspective and focus [I'm trying to be polite]. The technologies of film and digital sensors are vastly different. For example digital sensors still have a long way to go to match the color saturation of ISO 100 film. It's the old story of apples and oranges. At the end of the day, it's not the tools, it's not the mastery of the tools. It's all about the result - the light, the subject, the composition, etc. A talented photographer can take a cover shot photograph with a drugstore box camera, while an over equipped, untalented buffoon can ruin any Kodak moment.

Answer 3

It is not as if there is an actual restriction on how far you can enlarge a 35mm negative, more it is an issue of what you find aesthetically pleasing. Lets take for example the photographer Sebastio Salgado who uses a 35mm Leica in combination with Kodak TMax3200 a high speed film noted for its pronounced grain http://www.terra.com.br/sebastiaosalgado/. Most photographers who intend to print large, say beyond 16x20 and who are very particular about grain and tone,would probably not even consider using this particular film nor use such a small film format. A photographer who doesn't like grain and likes images which are rich and deep in tonality or color would probably stick with a relatively low ISO film and a larger format film like 4x5, 5x7 or 8x10. However, Salgado doesn't seem to mind the grain and prints quite large, in some cases beyond 30 inches in width. In a way it is his signature style.
If you have your own enlarger and a relatively good sized dark room you can print to whatever size you choose. There is no given rule that says you can't make mural prints with 35mm, it can be done and I have done it, it is a stylistic choice which is absolutely up to you.

Answer 4

In short, no. How large you can go depends on the quality of your negative. If you used a slow film speed, you can enlarge to a greater degree than the same shot with a faster film. The problem you will encounter is that at some point, the enlargements will start to become grainy. How big you can go before the grain becomes too distracting is a matter of personal choice, and the film speed of the negative. Some people like the look of grainy pictures and purposely enhance the look.
I shoot 100 speed film, and have found that 11x14 is about the limit if you dont want grain, which I don't. Not all my negatives will go that large without excessive grain. However, I can usually take them up to 8x10 without a problem.

If you want to go larger than 11x14, or want constistently to print at that size or larger, you might consider going with a medium format camera.

I suggest you experiment some with the current film you're using, and if you dont like the results, try using a slower speed film. The slower the film, the larger you should be able to enlarge without excess grain. That is if the grain bothers you. Again, some people like the grain and take steps to enhance it.

Good luck.

Answer 5

At the moment, I'm looking at an 11x14 print made from a 35mm negative. This particular shot was made on Kodak 400UC negative film(really fine grain), and taken with a Canon F-1 handheld using a 50mm 1.4 lens close to wide open(I think it was at about 1.8). The shutter speed was 1/125. While it is a tad bit soft, it really looks great, especially from a viewing distance of two or three feet.

With care, it's certainly possible to get great results at 11x14 or larger. Use a tripod, mirror lockup, cable release/self timer, fine-grained film(Fuji Velvia is great for landscapes), and stop down to the lens's sweet spot(usually around 5.6 or f8). Do all of that, and you can probably get great results a 11x14, and passable at 16x20.

If you need to get larger, you probably should consider medium format.

Answer 6

it really depends on film speed, you can usually go up to 8x10 with 200 speed film, any bigger than that the image becomes grainy and out of focus, the bigger you enlarge a print the more obvious any imperfections are. the faster the speed of film (the higher the number) the grainier the image will be. if you want to make poster size prints then you should use as slow a film speed as possible (100 or lower). unfortunately if you are shooting to stop action you're kind of out of luck w/ large prints. hope that helps

Answer 7

I've printed a 16x20 with 35mm film. It was a nice city scape. It came out a little soft because the camera's over 30 years old, but it still looks great. Any print will look "eh" if you get close enough. :)

Answer 8

Unless you have sharpest images of pictures,you could print them at 16x20 inches or poster size.