Efke's Direct Positive Paper

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by arealitystudios, Aug 3, 2008.

  1. arealitystudios

    arealitystudios Member

    Messages:
    229
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Location:
    Portland, Or
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I know there has been a few threads in the past about this stuff, but I feel it is interesting enough to warrant some further discussion.

    I've been using it fairly extensively with pinhole photography, which is something I think it is very well suited for. I've got a few questions for the experts out there though...

    First off, I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around this because I'm so used to dealing with negatives, but if my print comes out too dark in the developer, because it is a direct positive it is underexposed correct? I know that sounds like a dumb question, but seriously my brain just can't comprehend it.

    Also, as others have said, this stuff is really contrasty. With pinhole work I don't mind this so much as looks pretty cool, but it has been mentioned that "pre-flashing" the paper can help reduce this. Does anyone have any links to some tutorials about this? I assume it means blasting the paper with some light prior to exposure, but for how long? Five seconds? Ten seconds? How strong of a light source?

    Anyway, thanks everyone for your time!
     
  2. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,239
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    1. Does a negative become 'blacker' with underexposure or not? No, it doesn't. Same principle here, but it's reversed. When you make a print in the darkroom, the areas that are darkest on the print are those that received most exposure. If your print is too dark, you overexposed.
    2. I have heard it has a lot of contrast. You may fool around with diluting your developer to tame that somewhat. I have not tried this paper yet, but I'm thinking filtration might help you too. Perhaps a blue or a green filter could help tame the contrast to some extent???
    Good luck,
    - Thomas
     
  3. Removed Account

    Removed Account Member

    Messages:
    907
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Nanaimo, Bri
    Shooter:
    35mm
    It seems to me to make more sense looking as if it were slide film. When underexposed it's dark, overexposed it's light (or clear). Your own post Thomas shows this, although it's true I don't know how direct positive paper works. The negative stays clear with underexposure, and a print resulting from that negative would be dark when printed using the normal 'minimum time for maximum black'.
     
  4. matt miller

    matt miller Subscriber

    Messages:
    829
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Location:
    Iowa
    Shooter:
    Multi Format

    It's not a dumb question at all. I had the same trouble getting it straight in my head when I used polaroid for the first time. Like polaroids & slide film, both positives, underexposure results in a darker image. I haven't used this paper, but it's got to act the same way, right?
     
  5. Jim Noel

    Jim Noel Member

    Messages:
    2,159
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Any direct positive material is too dark if UNDER exposed, and too light if OVER exposed.
     
  6. arealitystudios

    arealitystudios Member

    Messages:
    229
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Location:
    Portland, Or
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Thanks guys! I had a feeling I was right, but its amazing how once you get used to thinking one way (in terms of a negative) it becomes difficult to force your brain to think the opposite way.