Ever thought of it? Is there anyone here tried it that can comment on techniques?
Ever thought of it? Is there anyone here tried it that can comment on techniques?
Technically it's no different than making contact proofs. Of course your color balance/density/cleanliness/ standards should be at the highest level you can achieve. Dodging and burning are no different than when enlarging.
There are/were some on display at panavision hollywood. 5x7's but they looked so good.
Thanks. I'm going to try it. I'm thinking that by using a 180mm enlarging lens, raising the head and stopping down, I can raise the print time to allow for reasonable dodging and burning.
Nine bucks a sheet is expensive but at least the paper isn't (yet). For the right kind of image they would be little jewels.
Thomas
Your biggest problem will be controlling the print process. How are you going to process the prints?Originally Posted by tgtaylor
I like to make proofs(contact prints) of my 4x5 and 8x10 color negatives after they've been processed. I don't have a hi-end scanner, and right now, send out for drum scans, so I need a cheap, and fast method of being able to see which shot is best.
because color work must be done in complete darkness, dodging and burning I've found usually isn't as repetitive and accurate as it is with b/w, which you can "see" the negative before/after printing.
controlling the processing of the print itself, you have almost no control. I use the roller-transport processor at the local photo center, so I'm not able to manipulate chemistry to lower, or raise contrast.
However, IF you have quality negatives from the get-go, then you can always contrast mask and all that fun stuff to raise/lower local contrast, IF you want to go that far.
-Dan
I use a Jobo CPA-2 with Kodak C-41 chemistry so processing the paper or tweaking the chemistry is a simple matter.
Dodging and burning is the same as with B&W only that color paper prints a lot faster than B&W - 9 or 10 seconds max - under the enlarger. In another thread Bob Carnie suggested inserting a ND gel in the mixing box to achieve a longer exposure time. That would certainly work but instead of inserting it in the mixing box I'm thinking of placing it under the lens in the enlargers filter holder since I won't have to worry about degrading the image.
In the past I have changed colors on the print (e.g., a dull grey sky to a nice blue sky) by using acetate masks on the paper and printing using different filter packs. I'm on the lookout for a better method.
Thomas
By contact printing, you apparently mean you're going to take a color negative processed in C41 then expose it under a light in a contact frame holding some kind of
conventional C-paper, then process it in RA4. Right? Just expose under a conventional
colorhead to adjust the color balance, and control the light intensity using the timer and lens f-stop. It takes a little practice but is otherwise quite easy to do. You can
process the prints in drums using one-shot RA4 chemisty. If you can accurately control
time and temp of the chemicals, you should be able to get superb prints. Dodging and
burning are no more difficult than with on black and white paper. You just have to get used to the look of a color negative, run a test strip then maybe a trial print.
I shot a portrait project on 10x8 C41 then contacted them onto Fuji crystal archive and I have to say, first it was very easy to do and second, the quality was fantastic, I used a durst 705 with a colour head using the recommended filter pack as the starting point and processed them in a Nova slot processor . It was far easier to print than B&W and so much better than scanning and outputting to Ink jet. So if you have a 10x8 project and feel that 30x40 prints are a bit shouty then I would suggest that the contact print is something worth considering, and if I remember correctly both Stephen shore and Joel Meyerowitz both originally presented there work as contacts
Yes, both Shore and Meyerowitz contact printed until they could afford to enlarge their negatives. Both were suprisingly bad printers back in their starving artist era but
steadily improved. The other night I was looking at a book of Meyerowitz's Tuscany
images and was amazed at how much he mastered that particular category of film -
definitely the old-school low-contrast Vericolor look. By contrast, I'm printing right now
with the latest version of Crystal Archive and the newest Kodak films. Printing 8x10
these negs onto 20X24 is like shooting ducks in a barrel; and indeed, I hope to soon
be able to come up the quality which I could only expect of much more expensive
print media before.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks