Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,524   Posts: 1,543,819   Online: 787
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nixa,Mo.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    45
    Not getting rid of the pearl 'cause I like it's surface on the final prints,so my MO is going to be shooting on glossy and printing on pearl (for the time being).I must say pinhole is starting to interest me(DANG! you guys, I hardly get involved in one thing and another pops up).I'd been thinking some time in the future of carbon printing BUT! this pinhole thing keeps nudging in on me.....
    By the way(back on subject), I'm finding that paper negs shot in a portrait/in door situation require a little different preflash than outdoor/ landscapes.Is this the case or am I just chasing rabbits?

  2. #12
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,288
    Images
    301
    I have been using a box of very expired Forte Polygrade IV by printing normally on it, and printing about 1/3 stop heavier than normal. After the print is washed I have been bleaching the prints back to crisp white borders for a lovely looking print.

    It isn't just age fog that's a problem that increases with time, but contrast is lowered also. This has to be taken into account. If you think about it, this makes for an ideal paper negative situation.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,392
    I've just finishing developing a batch of paper negatives with a mix of pearl and gloss finishes. The gloss ones scan better, and generally "look" better, but I haven't done enough contact printing with them yet to see if there's a significant difference in my darkroom.

    As for indoors vs outdoors - Spectral range I suppose - indoors with tungsten lighting much redder.

  4. #14
    NedL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Sonoma County, California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    836
    Images
    15
    I have no idea about different pre-flashing for indoors vs. outdoors. What pdeeh said makes sense.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nixa,Mo.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    45
    I agree Ned,Pedee seems to have hit on it.Thanks for the input.
    Thomas would you post some pictures using your technique? I'd love to see them....

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,286
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    49
    you might be able to get a better print
    by split developing in a hard and slow/soft working developer
    i use ansco 130 ( dektol is fine ) 1:2 when the image starts appearing
    put it into a coffee developer to compensate, slow it down and finish the development
    if the image isn't contrasty enough put it back in the dektol ( and then back again ).
    regular old caffenol will work too, without the jump start, but it often times takes 2x the normal developing time ...
    or you can do test exposures and use the developer full strength adn develop
    1min (rc) and 2mins ( fb ) ... i shoot 80% expired paper, expired liquid emulsion on paper+glass
    and this / these routines work very well, at least in the situations i photograph in.

    if you are using vc paper you can use a enlarging filter to tame the contrast, or photograph in open shade /
    flat light ... photo paper is weird-stuff ... sometimes it is slow ( iso 3 or 6 ) sometimes it is fast ( iso 25 )
    depending on the time of year, time of day type of light/day, lack of light. shooting paper
    i have an enormous respect for people who used pre panchromatic emulsions back in the "olden days" ...


    ( also, if you are hoping to contact print onto another piece of photo paper, a full range / dense paper negative isn't as good as a "thinner" one
    wax or parafin helps make the paper translucent ... )

    good luck !

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nixa,Mo.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    45
    It's been a while but I finally have a chance to try "cooking" some new paper before using to see if it "aged" and altered it's contrast and it appears to me that it does.

    The one on the right was"cooked" before using.
    Both pictures were cut from the same sheet of Ilford Multi-Grade glossy paper and both were pre-flashed for 12 seconds.Used a 180mm lens at f 8 for one second camera exposure,the developed in Dektol 8:1 for 4 minutes.
    It appears the"cooked" one lost some speed as well as has lower contrast.
    The"cooking" consists of sealing the paper in a can and roasting in a toaster oven at 90 degrees for 2 hours.
    My first try was at 250 degrees(I forgot gelatin melts at about 97 degrees) LOL! Needless to say it wasn't successful....
    Still having a great time learning to use in-camera paper negatives.
    Let me know what you think.....
    Don

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