Scan the negative. Use the clone stamp or healing wand to spot the scan. Then print the scan on a transparent material to make a digital negative. Then contact print that.
Hey, I didn't say you'd WANT to! (I certainly don't. I like Thomas's acronym LIMIWAC - Look I Made It Without A Computer!)
But Roger, you'd still have possible dust spots between the digitally-produced negative and the paper. So you'd still have to spot the print...
No, the only way to digitally spot a print is make a computer-controlled spotter. After you'd identified the spots, it would then take care of the mechanical part of doing the spotting work.
> The ways I am familiar with, none of which I've had success with:
4. Put a very small piece of black paper on the area of the spot before starting expose the paper.
You use your digits to hold the spotting brushes/tools.
Originally Posted by JBrunner
When you don't fill the tank as much as you should...
You still have printable shots. I did this tonight. Haven't done it since I used Paterson tanks 30 years ago.
I didn't have that much film to develop so instead of doing just one roll, I decided to do one 35mm and one 120.
I have no idea why I was thinking 12 ounces would cover both and 16 was plenty. Why don't I know by now how much it takes to cover 1 each of 35mm + 120 in a tall Nikor tank?
At least the 35mm roll was on the bottom. It got fully developed.
A partially submerged roll of 35mm is pretty much hosed.
But the MF has plenty of compositional opportunities, even though only 2/3 of the film was submerged. Many of the shots on tonight's roll will work out OK. Only a couple are ruined.