Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
I don't really understand "no need for a paper negative" just because he has a print that is one of his worst. So with a convoluted improvised reversal process one can get a bad print and this is somehow preferable to a pretty simple straightforward process likely to yield a decent print?
I was figuring out the process of reversal processing paper. Now all that's left is for me to tweak the process a bit, and I should consistently be good prints.

Never did I saw that bad print was as good as it's going to get. When I get another chance to print, I should be able to tweak the process to get what I want. For this session, I was just happy I got the process to work.

I am aware of the process of making paper negatives and then printing those, but I dont see how that would be any faster or more convenient. I'd have to develop those prints, wait for them to dry, store them until I can print them, and then print them. The reversal printing process takes a while for each individual print, but I do have a positive print when i'm done. It looks like all I have left is to perfect contrast and I'm good to go. I personally dont have any contrast filters; I've borrowed some from the school darkroom, so I'll be ordering some when I get paid

In my mind, the only advantage I can see to having a paper negative is the paper negative isnt ran through a bleach or clear bath. I dont know how well that stuff will wash out of FB paper... I guess I'll make some good prints and see how long they last before I see any damage. If they deteriorate within a few weeks or months, I guess I'll go the paper neg route

I hope this post doesnt seem like i'm ranting or bashing anyone; i'm really not. This is just a process I was curious about. I might end up doing paper negs when I print slides. At the very least, I can say I've reversal processed paper, and that seems worth the time for me to figure it out