Galaxy Paper

[Robert Perrin]

Has anyone here received their Galaxy direct positive paper? If so, if it was to be with chemistry was the chemistry included. If without chemistry are processing requirements and/or formulas included?

[David Aimone]

Paper came today. Basic instructions, but I didn't order the chemicals and there are no specifics on what to use or where to get theirs....

[jaapdijks]

Received my paper this week.
No useful,instructions or suggestions for developers other than galaxy hyperspeed developer. Whatever that may be.

Since i am in europe no chemicals could be send to me.
I dont know if their proprietary developer will ever be available here.

I will try some developers i have when i find time.



jaap

[Robert Perrin]

David and jaap, thank you. That's encouraging. Mine is to be with chemistry but hasn't arrived. Adorama lists the chemistry http://www.adorama.com/searchsite/default.aspx?searchinfo=direct+positive+paper While Ive been waiting I looked up Kodak's processing for the Super Speed Direct Positive Paper that Galaxy was designed to replace. With a 15 second rinse between each step, it was 45 seconds in D-88, bleach 30 seconds in R-9, clear 30 seconds in CB-1, and redevelop in T-19 for 60 seconds. In just a very brief search I found most of the formulas on the internet and they are probably all in sources like the Photo Lab Index.

[Robert Perrin]

It came! Sometime Monday UPS left a box on my porch. Packed in lots of foam "peanuts," a one liter chemistry kit and in a packet on the back the package of paper. An unexpected surprise, the chemical pack includes goggles and gloves. Another surprise, the directions say a tray of diluted developer is good for one to two weeks and a half full bottle of developer concentrate two months.

[AuditorOne]

Well, mine arrived but there was no packet of instructions included in the box. Each bottle had mixing instructions. Guess I'll have to drop them a note.

EDIT - I also have noted that the developer ingredients consist of hydroquinone and sodum sulfite. That seems to be a very weak developer. I may have to do a search for formulas containing these ingredients.

[Toyon]

I emailed them to get some clarification on developers and toners. But they have not responded. They are off to a really bad start. Maybe Kickstart should revert to Kickass in this case.

[AuditorOne]

I just received a pdf with the instructions from Galaxy. Sent them a note through their contact page.

[Paul Ewins]

My paper turned up yesterday, but as noted the instructions leave a lot to be desired. If anyone figures it out please post here so that I can give it a try.

[Robert Perrin]

My chemistry (one liter with 4x5 paper) came with a brief pamphlet of mixing and processing instructions. With the exception of developer dilution mixing was simple and straight forward, one component in water to make 33 oz. The 16 oz bottle of developer says it makes 33 oz but the directions show developer dilution as 1-2.5 which I took to be one part stock to 2.5 parts water. I'd exposed two sheets of paper to a soft window light lit portrait to try it out. I opted for the more dilute version to start with. Processing instructions are simple and for the usual 68F B&W processing temperature, 2 min. in the developer, 1 min. each in the bleach, clearing, and redevelopment (which they term toning) with a one minute rinse between each step and a 10-15 min. final wash. The first sheet was way to dark. I processed the second sheet for 2.5 minutes which produced a definite improvement and points to the bottle rather than the directions pamphlet being correct. When I can try again I'll use the 1:1 dilution. I'll eventually try some other developers and bleaches.

[Rael]

When I wrote to them about the developer, they sent me to this page for the recipe: http://dark-room.org/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=31

I have 25 sheets of 5x7 that I received last week. I had no idea when I backed the kickstarter that it was a dev/bleach/tone process -- and I don't think I'm up for cooking the recipe. They told me I could develop it with regular chemistry if I wanted a negative...but if I wanted a negative, I'd use film. Anyone interested in trying this stuff?

[DrTang]

I want them to come up with a way of processing in a 'machine processor'

so I can shoot / then process right on the spot and then staple the finished work up on the wall

if I have to do all that monkeysnot..I might as well shoot film

[Rael]

I want them to come up with a way of processing in a 'machine processor'

so I can shoot / then process right on the spot and then staple the finished work up on the wall

if I have to do all that monkeysnot..I might as well shoot film

The only thing interesting to me about it at the moment is that each shot is one of a kind.

[jamiehughes]

I am shooting this paper in my pinhole cameras and developing with the galaxy chemicals. not finding a whole lot of images posted with the galaxy paper. My images are coming out pretty dark and wondering if anyone has some development suggestions. I have not tried the reg - dev/stop/fix for a neg, only the dev/wash/bleach/wash/clear/wash/toner/wash that was suggested by galaxy

[jamiehughes]

152838

[jamiehughes]

No 1 was done in a homemade pinhole coffee can. F208, metered at 120, exposure 4 minutes.

[jamiehughes]

152839

this was done with the Ilford Obscura pinhole camera, F248, metered 120, exposure 4 minutes

[Oren Grad]

I've moved Jamie's posts from the Kickstarter thread to this one.

[jamiehughes]

very nice, thank you

[Gadfly_1971]

Jamie,

I haven't used the Galaxy stuff, but those images look an awful lot like underexposed examples I shot on a single weight direct positive paper a few years ago. I had to wrap my head around the fact that darker meant not enough exposure (which is backwards compared to what negative printing is like). Perhaps you haven't had a processing error and have under exposed instead?

Good luck,
Andrew

[jamiehughes]

Thank you, I believe that may be the case, the iso 120 is fabulous but just does not work my pinhole. Reciprocity maybe? oh well, last night i did a couple more test sheets and got a better result, I metered for iso 120, 4 minutes so i tripled the exposure and shot for 12 min. I did get a better image but still a little dark. tonight i will multiply by 5 and see what happens, should be metering around 25 or so.

[jamiehughes]

here is the latest from my testing

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=153058&d=1469021112

[jamiehughes]

50 minute exposure, homemade coffee tin at f208.

[jamiehughes]

here is something i thought may work. I have a Polaroid minute maker plus SE that i scored at GW for 4.00, ran handful of packfilm through it and she works perfect. I shoved a piece of the galaxy paper in, latched the door and went out side for a shot. Googled and found maybe works at f9.2 or something like that, I set the light/dark knob to normal, set the focus to 3.5, handheld as best i could, and here is what came out

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=153059&d=1469021401

[jamiehughes]

I have 3 shots lined up for the ride home today, one in the ilford obscura, one in the coffee tin and one in the polaroid. there is a nice field of trees and a stump on my way home, I'm going to stop by and shoot all the same scene and see what happens.

[jnantz]

fun stuff jamie !
thanks for posting images to this thread
with the paper + process !

i hope you don't mind me living vicariously through you for a few posts :)

john

[Rael]

I have an unopened packet of this in 5x7 if anyone is interested in playing around with it. I bought it not knowing the full process -- I thought it was like the Harman. Free if you pick up shipping.