Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,931   Posts: 1,556,963   Online: 1027
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    10
    Images
    2
    Mike: Thank you for your help. I probably don't have a clue...but I don't quite understand your last sentence. Albumen requires UV. Or am I really wrong about that? My enlarger becomes very hot because I am projecting small negative images onto the larger x ray film. For the albumen printing I only use sunlight.

  2. #12
    Mike Wilde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Misissauaga Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,939
    Images
    29
    Sorry, I thought albumin was a silver process with the silver suspended in the egg product in lieu of gelatin. Too many alt processes swimming in my head these days, I guess.

    I guess there are a lot of cheesecakes being made for albumin followers. Somehwere I read that when albumin was a popular process there would be suggestions on what to cook up with all of the surplus yolks that were a by product of the original albumin source.
    my real name, imagine that.

  3. #13
    davido's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    toronto, ontario canada
    Shooter
    Holga
    Posts
    461
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainecoonmaniac View Post
    This is a cool site.

    http://thelightfarm.com/Map/DigitalN...tivesPart1.htm

    It seems that there's little difference. However, I think digital negs made with inkjet film has revived alt process printing. Making analog dupe negs requires a darkroom. I doing some test with inkjet negs too. The difficulty is matching the alt process with your computer.
    I totally agree that inkjet negs have revived alt process.
    However, I still think they are not as sharp as film can be. I have used lith film for enlarged negs and those are unbelievably sharp.
    You can't see sharpness on a monitor, you have to see the prints.

  4. #14
    davido's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    toronto, ontario canada
    Shooter
    Holga
    Posts
    461
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by claras View Post
    Thank you all for your help. This x ray film I"m using, if that is what it is, is the film from Photo Warehouse. I have gotten better results from the x ray film than from trying to control the contrast with litho film. I have also experimented with digital negatives, but I'm thinking the printer I currently have will simply not produce enough density. The Photo Warehouse film is relatively inexpensive and produces good negatives, but it is not a variable contrast material and it is, I think, a matter of dialing in exposure and development.
    The real problem is that it requires somewhat long exposure, and I"m thinking that using x ray film to enlarge original negatives made for albumen will create even longer exposure. My enlarger head is already only slightly less hot than the surface of the sun .
    Is there any reason why selenium toning could not be used to increase density or contrast with x ray film?
    Yep, it's needs a lot of exposure. I doubled the wattage of my enlarger bulb to 150 watts (they are typically 75 watts) and my exposures are F5.6 for almost a minute (that's for an 8x10 image with a 80mm lens from a medium format neg). So the enlarger is fairly close to the easel.
    I'm using straight dektol (it's usually mixed 1:3 for prints) I've also using a glass neg carrier as the exposures are long and with the brighter bulb, the negative would undoubtably warp.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    10
    Images
    2
    Mike: You want to see something disgusting...look at 12 or 15 egg yolks without the egg white and think about eating them. Kind of bothers me to do it, all those little baby chickens, but I generally toss them. Fortunately, albumen goes a long way and doesn't go bad quickly.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    10
    Images
    2
    Davido: (Sorry about the blank post...)
    A minute?! A minute?! I am using a 75mm lens. Also medium format negatives...and my exposures sometimes go on for ten minutes! What am I doing to make things harder for myself? Haven't used straight dektol, only diluted, and my light is 75 watts. Would that be enough to account for the difference? I am using Photo Warehouse film.

  7. #17
    davido's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    toronto, ontario canada
    Shooter
    Holga
    Posts
    461
    Images
    17
    Claras, I would cut down on your exposure time to a couple of minutes and use stronger developer (around 3 minutes developing). Remember you are exposing for the shadow areas. It's opposite, so if you have no detail in the shadows, then you are exposing too long. The developer builds up your density (or your high-lights). So unless you have really dense original negs, two to three minutes exposure should be fine. This is also for printing an 8x10 size.



    S

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin