So how do you guy get a positive print from the paper neg?
If there was a easy way to get a positive print from a paper neg, I would shoot it all the time.
I could just shoot positive paper reliably, i would do that.
I tried this with my crown 4x5 . it didnt turn out to bad. I would like to know more about it.
like cj said how do you get a positive ?. when the weather get's a little warmer i'll try some more.
I know you can do a wet contact print or can scan them, but is there a faster way that I could do it on location? I really want to just shoot a positive. I really want to do wetplate but this could solve the problem.
the easiest way to get a positive can't be discussed here because it involves
an electronic device ... but the best way to get a positive print is by contact printing
the in camera negative onto another sheet of paper ...
emulsion to emulsion, under a piece of glass or in a contact printing frame
and you make your exposure.
a fellow appugger ( david william white ) in an interview i heard on the film photography forecast
( you have to poke around the archives )
removes the lens from his enlarger and makes contact prints using enlarger light, and when he needs to
poly contrast filters ... i had never heard of doing that and it is ingenious !
have fun !
hand coating light weight paper ( like writing paper ) is easy to project light through as well.
the first paper photographs ( calotypes ) were made on writing paper and contact printed,
i would love to see some in person ...
Last edited by jnanian; 02-23-2012 at 12:54 PM. Click to view previous post history.
im empty, good luck
Originally Posted by cjbecker
on location you would need a darkroom ... or you could do as the street photographers in mexico, and cuba and india
do which is have portable darkroom attached to your camera, where you process the negative, and then make your contact print
using your camera as an enlarger ( just letting light in ) to expose your paper which is now in the film holder ...
and then processed again in your tank/portable darkroom.
there was an article in the Lat a few years ago featuring a photographer in india doing this, i will see if i can find it ...
Last edited by jnanian; 02-23-2012 at 11:44 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: added link to article
im empty, good luck
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
A bit about the three examples in my first post:
The paper is VC Ultrafine RC.
The bookshelf photo's were shot thru a YG (X-0) filter.
I didn't have a large yellow filter to help control contrast, so the YG had to do.
The blend of Yellow (lower contrast) and the Green (the low contrast component of VC papers) did the job.
I like the results, the various colors of the book spines recorded a nice mix of gray tones.
I didn't meter the subject, just a bit of byguess/bygolly (±5 second exposures).
The outdoor photo (gates & fence) was without a filter.
I used ISO 3, but should've used ISO 6.
Developed in some old pseuodo Ansco 130.
One glug of 130 + 4 glugs of water in a tray.
Bookshelf negs developed ± 6 minutes.
Outdoor shot (overexposed 1 stop) developed ± 1.5 minutes.
i've used an enlarger light to make contact prints before, but I had the lens on. What does taking the lens off have to do with anything?
I am trying to figure out a way that I can do this out in the field. I could make a box that has a hole in it and use that hole for the light to make a contact print with. I would also use the box to develop and fix it.
I did not realize there were more then one post after mine.
not sure if i would use a shoe box, seeing photochems are wet and may not do well in a cardboard box ...
Originally Posted by cjbecker
with the lens removed you get all the light, ( not a fraction of it ( f-stops ) and there is no need to focus.
it also allows you to use polycontrast filters, if you have to, which is hard to do when using a flood light &c.
if i had to do this on location, i'd probably use something like a steamer trunk with sleeves that lead your arms inside
( kind of like an afghan camera ! )
and a big ruby-lith window so you can see what you are doing when you process ...
and then an aperture so you can control the light that enters the box ( like the hole you mention ) ...
it might also be useful to convert some regular photo paper to POP paper, so it can take longer exposures
in sunlight, and only require fixer and toner, not developer, and and enlarger / darkroom &c.
supposedly you can convert developing out paper ( DOP ) to printing out paper (POP ), by do soaks in a 10% potassium nitrate solution
( air drying in darkness inbetween ) .. while i have my potassium nitrate dilute and paper ready to convert, i haven't done this yet
so i don't have first hand experience with this ...
I did my 1st paper neg recently as well, on some of Ron Mowrey's AZO from the workshop.
One of George Eastman's early contributions was a film on paper with a soluble gelatin layer between the well-hardened emulsion and the paper support. This lets you separate the two after exposure and makes for easier printing options at that point. This feat would be trivial for any of the emulsion makers out there.
The above negative is slated for a carbon print, and I'm curious what a honest-to-goodness print from a paper negative is capable of.