Mowrey's AZO in Camera

[holmburgers]

Here are the results of shooting an emulsion made in October at the GEH workshop with Ron Mowrey and Mark Osterman, in a camera.

One coating was done on subbed-melinex and the other on strathmore bristol paper, I believe.

Shot on a sunny day at 4 in the afternoon; Pentax spotmeter read 16 on the stone and 13.5 on the roof, indicating an exposure of 14 for me.

f/32

60 seconds for the paper
70 seconds for the film (got distracted...)

All told, I'm really digging this! The paper negative came out very strong and the neg seemed thin, though there's plenty of information on there, just not a lot of density. I'm quite curious about this..

My plan is to make a carbon print from the paper neg; a gift for my friends who were married in this building about a year ago.

However, the paper grain hides the resolution of this emulsion, which on the film is dang impressive. Coating flaws detract from it, but hey.. cut a guy some slack.

No matter what happens to film production, I know how to make this... and that makes me so happy.

*picture 1* - detail from film
*picture 2* - film negative
*picture 3* - positive from film neg
*picture 4* - paper neg
*picture 5* - positive from paper neg

The positives are just flipped scans, not prints.

[Kevin Caulfield]

Great result. Nice work and congratulations.

[fotch]

Amazing, really nice.

[holmburgers]

Thanks gents, appreciate the kind words.

[holmburgers]

Maybe Ron's reading this and can shed some light...

I remember a cautionary note about coating this emulsion on film; since it's non-absorbent the excess salts(?) won't absorb down into the fibers. One result is crystallization, but what else might that do?

In person, the paper negative is much denser than the film. Why might this be, considering that the exposures were approximately equal and even a bit longer on the film?

[yeknom02]

I would just like to express my envy... Some day I will be able to take one of those workshops...

[T-grain]

the paper negative is denser probably due to the fact that it has a reflective surface-actually, you "harvest" the light (almost) twice, hence more emulsion speed

In person, the paper negative is much denser than the film. Why might this be, considering that the exposures were approximately equal and even a bit longer on the film?

[holmburgers]

T-grain, that makes a lot of sense. Gracias!

[keithwms]

That's really terrific, very encouraging. Keep up the great work!

[A_Caver]

Looks very good, and fine detail