Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,514   Posts: 1,543,604   Online: 1119
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by scootermm View Post
    Any tips are trying to what to develop it [ AHPS ] in that would heed a continuous tone neg (preferably one to print in pt/pd)?
    I use one of two developers - normal paper developer (Kodak Dektol 1:2) or a formula called Soemarko LC-1. ( http://members.aol.com/fotodave/Articles/LC-1.html ) The latter is a home made formula mixed from scratch for really low contrast negatives. Dektol will give a normal looking, yet slightly high contrast negative, whereas LC-1 creates a low contrast negative with a sepia-ish appearance.

    I create these negatives for cyanotypes. I'm not certain, but I think the contrast/gamma range for pt/pd is somewhere in the same range as cyanotypes.

    If shot in camera, take into account that APHS is painfully thin material, and may sag or fall out of a big film holder when the dark slide is pulled (however, I've had no problems with it in my 4x5). It also isn't sensitive to red, yet that in itself can be a really neat effect for a in-camera negative!

  2. #22
    rwyoung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lawrence, KS
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    704
    Images
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    They don't make XP2 in anything bigger than 120, and the orange mask in the film base is not a proportional stain, it is a uniform stain which just adds density. For alt-process, avoid like the plague. For silver-gelatin based enlarging, it's wonderful.
    Unless it changed, I thought XP2 had a relatively clear base. Kodak's chromogenic film on the other hand does have the orange mask...

    Rob
    Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things! http://rwyoung.wordpress.com

  3. #23
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,356
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    439
    You may be right on that- it's been a while since I handled XP2. I think it still has some kind of mask, maybe more purple-ish than orange.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Aurora, OH
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    76

    HP5+ for Alt Processes

    Sandy and others,

    I've seen several posts of this nature claiming that HP5+ couldn't yield a high enough DR for some alt processes. I have worked with 12x20 and 8x10 HP5+ for Pt/Pd and Pd/NA2 printing and have had no problems at all in obtaining a density range of 1.6 to 1.9. In fact, some of my negatives require an excessively long exposure because my highlights are around 2.3 UV density. I'm using a modified Wimberley pyro-metol developer. Even with little stain, the film holds up well and doesn't get into the shoulder portion of the curve in the highlights. Of course I'd prefer to shoot TMY in 12x20, but as we all know, it isn't always available.

    Bob Herbst

    Quote Originally Posted by sanking View Post
    I did not mention TRI-X 320 either.

    Either HP5+ or TRI-X 320 would work fine for scenes of normal contrast with a pt/pd mix. However, neither of these films is capable of enough contrast to give really good resuslts with albumen and salted paper printing, and probably not with straight palladium either, except in scenes of normal or above average contrast.

    Someone suggested on another site a possible improvement to the HP5+ emulsion to increase its potential to develop CI. Anyone know anything about this?

    Sandy

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by bobherbst View Post
    Sandy and others,

    I've seen several posts of this nature claiming that HP5+ couldn't yield a high enough DR for some alt processes. I have worked with 12x20 and 8x10 HP5+ for Pt/Pd and Pd/NA2 printing and have had no problems at all in obtaining a density range of 1.6 to 1.9. In fact, some of my negatives require an excessively long exposure because my highlights are around 2.3 UV density. I'm using a modified Wimberley pyro-metol developer. Even with little stain, the film holds up well and doesn't get into the shoulder portion of the curve in the highlights. Of course I'd prefer to shoot TMY in 12x20, but as we all know, it isn't always available.

    Bob Herbst
    Bob,

    The original question asked specifically about alternative processes such as albumen and salted paper. I agree with you that it is possible to get a DR of 1.6 - 1.9 from HP5+, but that is the *maximum* you can get, and processes like albumen and salted paper work best with DRs of 2.3 or more so there is no way HP5+ will give optimum results with these processes. And a DR of 1.9 is just at the borderline for straight palladium (even with scenes of normal SBR conditions), i.e. when no NA2 or dichromate is used to control contrast. If you try to photograph a scene with lower than normal contrast with HP5+ and hope to print with no NA2 or dichromate on straight palladium, LOL.

    Some contrst control is possible with all of these processes, but my experince tells me that very long scales processes work best without the use of contrast controls and that the best films for these processes are those that can reach the needed DR, without subsequent need for contrast adjustment in the sensitizer or developer.

    I wil allow that part of my thinking about HP5+ is based on the use of this film some 5-10 years ago when the emulsion was not capable of as much CI as is the current version of the film. HP5+ is actually a better film today for alternative printing than TRI-X 320, but neither are as good, at least in terms of potential for a high CI, as TMAX-400, FP4+ and Adox/Efke PL100.

    Sandy
    Last edited by sanking; 03-10-2007 at 02:58 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #26
    Dug
    Dug is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Seattle WA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    123

    Pyrocat and Litho

    Quote Originally Posted by scootermm View Post
    Danny you bring up an interesting point. Ive contemplated buying some sheets of 20x24 APHS Litho Film to cut down to 12x20 and shoot in camera. Any tips are trying to what to develop it in that would heed a continuous tone neg (preferably one to print in pt/pd)?
    Scootermm - I make enlarged negatives with the APHS film and use pyrocat, 1.5:1:100. I spent a lot of time mixing Dektol-like developers and altering contrast with various proportions of A and B developer. Could not get the consistency I wanted and found the contrast going from not enough to too much with small adjustments in proportions.

    I decided to simplify my life with using Sandy's original pyrocat formula and adjusting exposure times and A and B proportions of the pyrocat developer. While my application of this film is different from yours, it is worth keeping your developer shelf from groaning under the weight of dozens of bottles. And I am actually learning about how to make one developer work in ways I can predict.

  7. #27
    Joe VanCleave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    484

    APHS for Continuous Tone

    Folks;

    I've been watching this thread with interest, as last week I just embarked on some experiments with APHS as an in-camera film.

    For background, I've lurked here for awhile, posted a few times, but spend a lot of time over on F295 doing the pinhole and alternative lens thing.

    Last week I loaded up some 4x5 film holders with APHS and headed to Madrid, NM, a former coal mining town on the 'Turquoise Trail', between Abq and Santa Fe. My cameras were a Speed Graphic with a homemade lens, fashioned from a 7x50mm binocular objective, operating wide open at F3; and a pinhole camera operating at F416.

    In order to control contrast in bright sunlight with this film, I did three things:

    1) Pre-exposed the film in-camera. I have a piece of 1/8" thick white, frosted plastic, which functions to reduce the light throughput by ~2/3 stop. I placed this over the lens or pinhole and made a pre-exposure equal in time duration to the main scene's exposure.

    2) Develop using a mixture of dilute HC110 and Agfa Neutol WA. I only used this mixture because it's what I had on hand; perhaps a 3-part developer, as suggested earlier, would work better.

    3) I contact printed the resulting negative on VC paper using a grade 00 filter.

    The results can be seen in these two examples, the first from the F3 binocular lens and contact printed using a grade 2 filter, and the second from the F416 pinhole, contact printed using a grade 00 filter.

    The pinhole negative is intrinsically higher in contrast due to it being a sharper image than the improvised binocular lens image, thus requiring a lower grade of printing filter.

    I'm hoping to refine this technique on APHS negatives exposed in high-contrast light, like the pinhole example, so as to enable them to print on a more 'normal' contrast grade of paper.

    ~Joe
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails cherub001a_8125.jpg   coyotefence001a_959.jpg  
    Last edited by Joe VanCleave; 03-10-2007 at 04:43 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #28
    wilsonneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Northern NJ
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    578
    Images
    17
    I like the image of the cherub with the horn. Regardless of film or equipment matters, the image just works.
    Neal

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    montreal Quebec Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    10
    Thanks to everyone for taking the time for some great input I really appreciate it
    zgan

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Aurora, OH
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    76

    HP5 for Alt Processes

    Sandy,

    I'm printing Pt/Pd from recently exposed/developed HP5+ and TMY negatives now and both are giving me excellent results with DRs ranging from 1.3-1.9. You work in more processes than I do so I can only speak from a more limited scope, but I believe our differing opinions are rooted in different philosophies of negative DR and how that applies to our own personal workflow and process. For example, I never expose/develop for a maximum DR because it does not leave me with any latitude to reduce contrast in the printing or adapt to other metals mixtures. In Pt/Pd I use mixtures of both 50-50 with chlorate and all Pd with a small amount of NA2. I expose/develop my negatives for using a small to moderate amount of contrast agent. We work with different staining developers. There are many factors. Granted, this approach does not apply to processes like albumen that are relatively unforgiving of the negative DR.

    Bob

    Quote Originally Posted by sanking View Post
    Bob,

    The original question asked specifically about alternative processes such as albumen and salted paper. I agree with you that it is possible to get a DR of 1.6 - 1.9 from HP5+, but that is the *maximum* you can get, and processes like albumen and salted paper work best with DRs of 2.3 or more so there is no way HP5+ will give optimum results with these processes. And a DR of 1.9 is just at the borderline for straight palladium (even with scenes of normal SBR conditions), i.e. when no NA2 or dichromate is used to control contrast. If you try to photograph a scene with lower than normal contrast with HP5+ and hope to print with no NA2 or dichromate on straight palladium, LOL.

    Some contrst control is possible with all of these processes, but my experince tells me that very long scales processes work best without the use of contrast controls and that the best films for these processes are those that can reach the needed DR, without subsequent need for contrast adjustment in the sensitizer or developer.

    I wil allow that part of my thinking about HP5+ is based on the use of this film some 5-10 years ago when the emulsion was not capable of as much CI as is the current version of the film. HP5+ is actually a better film today for alternative printing than TRI-X 320, but neither are as good, at least in terms of potential for a high CI, as TMAX-400, FP4+ and Adox/Efke PL100.

    Sandy

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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