Paper negatives

[Fr. Mark]

Get pearl paper. It's really obvious under red LED lights.

[photonsoup]

Ha,I put a some in backwards. I told my friends it was a soft focus experiment! They thought that was cool, never did fess up till now.

[Reinhold Schable]

Touch a corner lightly with the tongue.
It'll be obvious which is which...

Reinhold

[tonyowen]

if in doubt, wet your lips and then hold the paper between your lips for a couple of seconds - then open your mouth.... The emulsion side will stick to your lip...
UGH


If you are loading in a darkroom, you can see which side has the emulsion. If you are using glossy paper, it's the shiny side.I wouldn't stick photo paper in my mouth, though. Lick your finger and touch the paper by the corner. Sticky side wins.

Touch a corner lightly with the tongue. It'll be obvious which is which...Reinhold

Get pearl paper. It's really obvious under red LED lights.

I agree with the 'wet finger' test.
I was given the paper, I'm not certain that what is in the boxes matches the box descriptions


Hey Tony, I'd say you are totally wrong. FB curves to the emulsion side, RC curves to the non-emulsion side.

Thanks for info - I've been given both FB and RC paper.
Googling "which is the emulsion side for multigrade paper" only yields the concave answer.
I'm surprised that, to me, such basic information is not on the leaflets in the boxes or on the Ilford website.
>>>>>
Thank you all for your comments
regards
Tony

[Roger Cole]

Multigrade versus graded isn't really important. What makes the difference here is the paper surface. Glossy, both RC and FB, are very obvious under a safelight and the RC is obvious in complete darkness by feel. RC pearl/satin/oyster and such are pretty obvious under safelight too. The only ones in my experience that aren't are some FB matte and semi-matte. The only paper I ever really had an issue with was the cotton stuff Freestyle had Efke coat for them. I forget what they called it though I still have a little in the darkroom. Nice paper for some images, shame about Efke, but it was like heavy weight newsprint on both sides. I resorted to small test exposures under the enlarger then remembering which side faced which way in the package.

[jnantz]

knowing which side is up is why i like to coat my own. it is easy
and if you can mark the non-emulsion side with a pencil or whatever.
it is easy to see which side is emulsion by the sheen too. good luck with
your paper trials !

[Wayne]

Take a piece of unexposed paper out in the light. Look at both sides. Feel both sides with your fingers. They feel different even with dry fingers. Close your eyes and practice a few times. Now you've got it.

[Rory_5244]

Sincere thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread which allowed me to muddle through taking my first paper negative pic. I don't have a safelight so I had to guess the development. I used 4x5 Ilford MGIV RC paper exposed for ISO 3 with a yellow filter. Developed in HC-110 1:9 for 3 minutes. Scanned via transparency adapter in the scanner like a real negative. 'Toned' in Silver Efex. Oh, the pic looked overexposed in PS when I inverted. I presume I rated the paper too low at ISO 3? Would that be correct? I used levels to fix it.

http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k532/moobie1/kardan45_0516_waterloo1a_zpsi3f8a9k5.jpg (http://s1114.photobucket.com/user/moobie1/media/kardan45_0516_waterloo1a_zpsi3f8a9k5.jpg.html)

[JoeV]

Sincere thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread which allowed me to muddle through taking my first paper negative pic. I don't have a safelight so I had to guess the development. I used 4x5 Ilford MGIV RC paper exposed for ISO 3 with a yellow filter. Developed in HC-110 1:9 for 3 minutes. Scanned via transparency adapter in the scanner like a real negative. 'Toned' in Silver Efex. Oh, the pic looked overexposed in PS when I inverted. I presume I rated the paper too low at ISO 3? Would that be correct? I used levels to fix it.

http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k532/moobie1/kardan45_0516_waterloo1a_zpsi3f8a9k5.jpg (http://s1114.photobucket.com/user/moobie1/media/kardan45_0516_waterloo1a_zpsi3f8a9k5.jpg.html)

Interesting image, well done.

For scanning reflective media like paper negatives it's much better to scan as reflective than as a transparent/translucent "film," because you won't get the internal fiber structure of the paper in the image - unless that's what you specifically want.

~Joe

[Rory_5244]

Thanks, Joe.

[Emil Schildt]

Well - this is actually not paper negs, but images I did on LF orthochromatic film, I recently re-discovered... (forgot I had them)

Made with 10x8 Gandofi - 300mm Boyer lens.

I kind of LIKE this film!!

(last one is a huge crop to see details...)

[B_Serge]

Just give a try to paper negatives.
This made on a 8 years old Russian paper Fotoprint, as 3 ISO, FKD 18x24 camera and self-made 330mm Periscope Lens.

152463

[tonyowen]

Two paper-negative images, both small portions of original 4x5 image.
iso rated at 12, seascape taken with yellow filter, the wall was very very dark and unlit.
135mm f4.7 xenar lens
seascape 1s @ f64, other image 4s @ f32
regards
Tony
152513152512

[Mkillmer]

8x19 paper negative, developed in paRodinal
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8436/29234817525_f1d75fab0f_k_d.jpg

[Emil Schildt]

That is a beauty!

[koraks]

Phenomenal contrast control for this medium!
Beautiful capture as well.

[Fr. Mark]

That's a really neat picture. What is it?

[Mkillmer]

A native Australian flower - or it might be Sth African!

[Mkillmer]

$2 Daffodil day at the Market
8x10 paper negative
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8330/28664195933_4aff882bcc_z_d.jpg

[Fr. Mark]

Daffodils? That's six+ months ago, oh, wait, you are heading into Spring down under, now I don't feel so time-warped. Almost forgot to say, I love the picture and love flowers in general.

[tonyowen]

157159
157160
157161

I’m very confused with the ‘quality” of the last batch of four paper negatives.
As normal I cut up a 8x10 piece of paper from a box of Ilford MGIV RC de luxe pearl multigrade paper using a roller cutter to give me four “4x5” sheets and loaded two double dark slides. [I assume that the sheet of paper chosen was as per the box label, but as I was given the box of paper there is no certainty]
The paper was cut and loaded in a bedroom with closed curtains and an orange darkroom light. The only difference being that a new carpet had been laid in that bedroom.
After wet chemistry processing the paper negatives were scanned using a HP 3520 all-in-one printer.
Two of the resulting images are ‘scattered’ with dark spots and part of another image is coloured brown!
Image01 and image02 (both infested with dark spots) were taken sequentially on a tide line with a gusty wind blowing at right angles to the camera line of view. Image02 is a small section of the full 4x5 positive – It is noticeable on this image that the “spots” are often in threes and a triangular pattern. In both cases the exposure was 1s and f11.
Image03 (coloured brown) was grossly underexposed but scanned with extreme brightness and contrast setting and the resulting image inverted to make a positive. This image was taken through a window with long exposure and large aperture setting.
The lens is a xenar f4.7 135mm fitted with a 40.5 to 58mm ring onto which is screwed a 2x yellow filter and a lens hood.
Paper negative processing was as usual - Jobo tank and 2509 holder using Ilford PQ Universal developer [1m], Ilfostop [10s], and Ilford rapid fixer [1m].
Any and all help welcome.
Regards
Tony

[Ray Heath]

G'day Tony, I'd suggest that you need to try again with known materials.

[tonyowen]

G'day Tony, I'd suggest that you need to try again with known materials.
Thanks Ray, I don't disagree I'm just wondering if there is any obvious reason before I change the variables
regards
Tony

[ipmphotography]

Hi There

I've shot paper negs on and off for years.

Here's my blog which has some paper neg info.

http://www.i-shootfilm.com

[tonyowen]

I've subsequently processed another single sheet of 8x10 paper and the resulting images DO NOT duplicate the problem that initiated this thread.
So it appears that the earlier 8x10 sheet had been corrupted.
regards
Tony

[-88-]

5x7 paper negative. Developed in caffenol c-m

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5599/30998231585_ee91f59335_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/Ped3hH)2016-11-15-002 (2) (https://flic.kr/p/Ped3hH) by Jukka (https://www.flickr.com/photos/14064287@N06/), on Flickr

[Randy]

Very nice ^

[John Kasaian]

Hi There

I've shot paper negs on and off for years.

Here's my blog which has some paper neg info.

http://www.i-shootfilm.com

Thank you for that link! I found it very interesting work.

[ipmphotography]

Hi John, it's a pleasure, glad you found it interesting.

The website is quite limited with what I can do with it at the moment seen as it's a blog, I'm in the middle of building a bigger site for that type of work, so hopefully I'll get the new site live sometime soon and update it with some new work.

best
ian

[ipmphotography]

nice shot :)

[-88-]

Thanks Randy and ipmphotography !

[papercam]

Thank you for that link! I found it very interesting work.

I too enjoyed your work. Can you elaborate on your modern day Talbotypes, it looks like you perfected the process. What toner do you use?

[jnantz]

rebranded -lford / phowowarehouse paper
empire
dektol+coffee

[Emil Schildt]

rebranded -lford / phowowarehouse paper
empire
dektol+coffee
love it!

[Taija71A]

157910

+1.

This is 'Really Good Stuff'. Thanks for posting it John!

[jnantz]

emil and tim,
thanks !
john

[jnantz]

I too enjoyed your work. Can you elaborate on your modern day Talbotypes, it looks like you perfected the process. What toner do you use?

according to the blog, the calotype/talbotypes are a modern, ilford paper negative, no toner is necessary...
not sure of the print, he suggests the paper negatives will be used for salt or albumen prints
so maybe now, the tonality is from PS ...
still, nice paper negatives or whatever he is calling them

[cplkao]

8x10 Korona Gundlach
330 mm f3.6 Liesegang Anastigmat/0.5s
Ilford Multigrade Pearl

Becky
160101

160102

160103

[cplkao]

Gabby

Voigtlander Portait Euryscope 14" f4.5
8x10 Ilford Multigrade Pearl

160269160274160275

[Randy]

Gabby

Voigtlander Portait Euryscope 14" f4.5
8x10 Ilford Multigrade Pearl
Very nice - pre flashed? ISO?

[cplkao]

Thanks Randy!
I usually rated at ISO 3 and I post-flashed the paper with a small LED rather than pre-flash it before the shoot.

This is the first outdoor shoot in the sun and I am using a hand shutter so most of the negs had been over-exposed! But luckily saved by adjusting in the scanning and darkroom, its gonna be hard to contact print it well...I need to get a packard shutter for outdoor shoot

Here are two more from the shoot.
160314
160313

[Randy]

Very inspiring. I have a good supply of very out of date paper but I have yet to play with paper negs - thanks for sharing. I am guessing (and this is just a guess) that it doesn't matter whether flashing is done pre or post exposure - it's the same affect...?

[cplkao]

Hi Randy,

I once saw a test done on APUG where they compare pre and post flashing and the difference is small and acceptable compromise. For me its a lot easier to post flash before developing to save time.

glad it had inspired you :)

[cplkao]

Saras
Clown/Physical Performer

8x10 Korona Gundlach
330 mm f3.6 Liesegang Anastigmat/0.5s
Ilford Multigrade Pearl

160585160586160587

[knuf]

my street
9x12 fomaspeed 311S, cropped to square
through 1.5$ plastic lens (f~25mm)

160598

[donkittle]

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/642/31839890704_48b486511c_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/QvzLdQ)
Meditative Sounds (https://flic.kr/p/QvzLdQ) by Don Kittle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/siderean/), on Flickr

I love singing bowls and have a small collection of them. This one, unfortunately, doesn't sing for me, but it's beautiful none the less. I decided to try to play with a still life scene, finally. I shot two images of this scene. The first was horribly under developed after 13 minutes in home-made caffenol - likely because I was using baking soda instead of washing soda (sodium bicarbonate instead of sodium carbonate). So I reshot the scene adding three stops (from a 2 second exposure to 16 seconds) and that turned out quite well.

Camera: Wista Deardorff V8
Lens: Hugo Meyer Rapid Gruppen Aristoskop 14" f5.5 (circa 1910)
Film: Film: Ilford Multigrade IV RC Paper, preflashed
Exposure: ISO 4, f5.5, metered at 1/2 second, adjusted to 2 seconds for bellows extension and shot for 16 seconds due to weak developer
Developed in Caffenol (6 tps Nescafe, 2000mg vit C, 3 1/2 tps Baking Soda) for 12 minutes at 21 degrees C
Movements: significant bellows extension

[Barry Kirsten]

You've nailed it technically and aesthetically, Don. Lovely image.

[chassis]

Don great image. Did you scan the paper negative, or contact print a positive, then scan?

[barnacle]

"Turned out quite well"???

That's a gem.

Neil

[John Earley]

Love the image Don. Especially the tone. Is that the negative tone or did you adjust it digitally.

[donkittle]

Thanks a lot, Barry and Neil - ya, I was pretty stoked about how it turned out :)

chassis - I scan the negative, invert the image but retain the original tones. No digital tinting for me - I just never seem to get it right that way (the tones always look garish)

John - I bring the image into Photoshop and duplicate the layer. I invert the bottom layer and set the blending mode of the top later to color (and leave that top later uninverted, not that that's a word).

[John Earley]

Thanks, good info.

[donkittle]

A couple of friends came over to play dressup so we could do a few portraits on a Deardorff 8x10 with a Kodak Ektar 12inch f4.5 lens. I shot these on Galaxy Hyperspeed paper which I rate at ISO 20. I wasn't getting enough light on my subject even with my Elinchrom strobe cranked to full power. I noticed the flash sync setting on the shutter has both an M and X and that I was on M. Perhaps taping it in the X position would help...

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/548/32621039431_4e6dabee74_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/RGBmwk)
Chantale (https://flic.kr/p/RGBmwk) by Don Kittle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/siderean/), on Flickr

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/626/32665061092_1584a585db_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/RLuYCu)
Esther (https://flic.kr/p/RLuYCu) by Don Kittle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/siderean/), on Flickr

https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3764/32025115823_76b7f2df4e_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/QMX6cn)
Esther (https://flic.kr/p/QMX6cn) by Don Kittle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/siderean/), on Flickr

[lightchemist]

Just started playing with paper again. Got a new (old) lens and made a shutter. Here is a shot with my Korona View 8X10, 7 inch unnamed Petzval, handmade guillotine/gravity shutter @1/45 sec
162349

[Randy]

^
Fantastic!

[Fr. Mark]

Very nice!

[lightchemist]

^
Fantastic!
Thank you!

[lightchemist]

Very nice!
Thank you!

[tonyowen]

handmade guillotine/gravity shutter @1/45 sec
Can you please provide details on your shutter construction, operation and repeatability
regards
Tony

[lightchemist]

Sure. I made this shutter out of black foam-core initially as a prototype to test and also for the light weight.
162556
The piece on the left is the body, the hole is the same on both sides and fits over the lens snugly. The pieces on the right are the shutters, Different sized/length hole for different speeds. I didnt use math to figure out the sizes, just cut a slit about 2 inches long and started from there. I tested the speed with my dlsr, cut a slit half the length, tested again, etc. I was looking for 1/125th and the smallest slit happened to be it. I hold the bottom part of the shutter over the hole, pull the dark slide, drop the shutter,(i have a stop on the bottom to keep the shutter from falling out.) replace the dark slide.
162568
Here it is attached to the lens.
It does okay on repeatability, but ideally I would want to make one out of wood with a metal slit. Right now, because I dont have the lens mounted properly, weight is an issue.
This is by no means a precise or completely reliable shutter. I estimate exposures are +/- 2/3 stop, but since Im just playing around, its good enough for me.
1/125th is the fastest I can get with this construction. I estimate I could possibly get 1/500 if it were made of wood and metal.
Hope this helps!

[Mkillmer]

For something a bit different...
8x10 RA-4 Colour Paper negative
Fuji Crystal paper developed in Tetenal RA4 developer.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3829/33028226670_efbfd2f4b8_z_d.jpg

[Randy]

Very nice

[tonyowen]

[QUOTE=lightchemist;Hope this helps![/QUOTE]
Yes very much indeed, I tried starting with the maths and assumed a falling body from rest, then used velocity for specific times, but got very confusing answers
regards
Tony

[John Earley]

For something a bit different...
8x10 RA-4 Colour Paper negative
Fuji Crystal paper developed in Tetenal RA4 developer.

Very nice.

[Fr. Mark]

MKillmer, that's really beautiful, it's a lisianthus, isn't it? I'm 99+% sure. Also, I don't yet know much about paper chemistry, but I would've assumed that what you had was a negative/positive process, not a direct positive, true? So, this is a contact print of a color paper negative? is that the usual paper developer? I don't know much about such things, so please excuse the newbie question.

[Mkillmer]

Yes, it is a lisianthus! RA4 is standard colour paper chemistry - I use it to make a colour paper negative. I have only scanned at this point, not contact printed.

[Fr. Mark]

Thanks for the information about the color photo of the flower. My wife and I really like lisianthus.

[Wayne]

Yes, it is a lisianthus! RA4 is standard colour paper chemistry - I use it to make a colour paper negative. I have only scanned at this point, not contact printed.

I would like to see the contact print, please.

[Rich14]

For something a bit different...
8x10 RA-4 Colour Paper negative
Fuji Crystal paper developed in Tetenal RA4 developer.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3829/33028226670_efbfd2f4b8_z_d.jpg

Just gorgeous. What did you estimate the E.I. of the paper?

Rich

[Rich14]

You might be able to emulate a contact print by "scanning" the paper negative on a light table/box with a DSLR, trying both emulsion up and down. You'll pick up the texture of the paper as would happen with contact printing.

Rich

[Mkillmer]

I shoot the paper at ISO 100, but have to apply the filter reductions. in this case. it drops down to ISO12.

[Mkillmer]

More RA4 colour paper negatives
This time 11x14 Kodak Supra III
Cokin 045 filter
Chems definitely getting weird - these flowers are purple!
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3804/33564836706_8d6f81d949_z_d.jpg
and some crops...
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3935/33476418561_5a9dde60fd_z_d.jpg
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2943/33605381345_4b53f58707_z_d.jpg

[chassis]

Pretty!


More RA4 colour paper negatives
This time 11x14 Kodak Supra III
Cokin 045 filter
Chems definitely getting weird - these flowers are purple!
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3804/33564836706_8d6f81d949_z_d.jpg
and some crops...
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3935/33476418561_5a9dde60fd_z_d.jpg
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2943/33605381345_4b53f58707_z_d.jpg

[Fr. Mark]

I do so love flowers. I enjoy seeing them in color even if the color is shifted. Thanks for posting.

[Pali K]

These are beautiful Mkillmer. Really interesting look.

Pali

[stawastawa]

Nice Mkillmer,
I have been playing with some similar subject matter. neat to see the color shift, interesting that it still seems realistic to me.
I like the textured background you are getting. It is a nice ambiance and contrasts nicely with the strange colors of the leaves.


More RA4 colour paper negatives

[Mkillmer]

More 11x14 RA-4 paper negatives. The daisy was very problematic to scan in...
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3937/33522377732_bea6fcb9b8_z_d.jpg
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3933/32865693713_396505e741_z_d.jpg

[Fr. Mark]

The colors are pretty strange, but some people I've heard of paint with color distortions like that. Personally, I have a hard time painting what I see, let alone intentionally distorting it. Neat pictures, if it were me and I had the bellows draw for it, I might've gotten in a lot closer on the blooms on the lisianthus. I think I see a crop to whole plate that I'd really like... Sl. off topic, is the ruffled edge a new variety?

[Alex DiBacco]

More RA4 colour paper negatives
This time 11x14 Kodak Supra III
Cokin 045 filter
Chems definitely getting weird - these flowers are purple!
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3804/33564836706_8d6f81d949_z_d.jpg

Jeez, that's beautiful. Those tones are spectacular.

[Barry Kirsten]

Agree. Very unique and beautiful images. Mark, do you have any idea which part of the chemistry may have changed to affect the colours in that way? My guess would be oxidation of one of the organics, e.g. a developer component, but I'm out of my depth with colour. Whatever the cause, the effect is stunning and it would be nice to be able to replicate for its artistic value. Great work!

[SMBooth]

These are stunning Mark.

[Mkillmer]

Another RA4 paper negative...
This is a quick shot of my little etching press. It ended up very dark, but same setting as previous shots - I guess I need more watts!
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3794/32900639603_827cac7af5_z_d.jpg

[Mkillmer]

... do you have any idea which part of the chemistry may have changed to affect the colours in that way? My guess would be oxidation of one of the organics, e.g. a developer component, but I'm out of my depth with colour...
As you guess, I also think it is probably the developer. There is a shot I took a few years ago - all the reds are gone, the carved angel's dress is pink - but is shows as blue. Next time I used the chems, it was dead.
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7406/12967331213_580d67eb1d_z_d.jpg
I think temperature also plays a part - but I cant quantify how that works exactly... maybe some colours are less active in lower temps?

[stawastawa]

sweet still life there.


I think temperature also plays a part - but I cant quantify how that works exactly... maybe some colours are less active in lower temps?

Very likely temperature does. but I have heard mixed information on this, when looking into temperature variation. the high temp may be just for convenient processing time, and the colors stay well balanced at different temperatures (if you get the processing time right).

Aside: anyone know if c41 chem can be used to dev Ra4 paper? pm me if so.

[Mkillmer]

Yes, c41 Chems can be used to develop ra4 paper


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mkillmer]

Way over exposed 11x14 RA4 paper negative...
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2942/33352940370_429dc0c218_z_d.jpg

[Fr. Mark]

I think the picture looks great and doesn't look blown out or over exposed to me. Maybe I just like pictures of flowers.

[Mkillmer]

11x14 RA4 paper negative
This picture gives a good idea of the RA4 paper latitude - hardly any!
Just a few feet away - you can't see other features in the room.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3848/32940329013_a25632f5cd_z_d.jpg

[-88-]

I found box of old agfa grade 1 paper. Scanned from 18x24cm negative and inverted in photoshop. No preflash, f5,6 and about 2 sec exposure.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2948/34106575616_953d35b666_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/TXT7Fb)Mariathene (https://flic.kr/p/TXT7Fb) by Jukka (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jalakanen/), on Flickr

[Emil Schildt]

This is Emilie
13x18cm paper negative.. Cooke 330 F3.5 series II lens

[Martin Aislabie]

This is Emilie
13x18cm paper negative.. Cooke 330 F3.5 series II lens

Terrific shot

I hope she likes it

Martin

[Mkillmer]

Fantastic... This is an incredible picture!


This is Emilie
13x18cm paper negative.. Cooke 330 F3.5 series II lens

[Emil Schildt]

thank you both

[Reinhold Schable]

Gazebo, with Judy.

Used a rattly old 8x10 Kodak 2-D.
Used a 250mm f:3.4 Wollaston Meniscus, with a YG (yellow green filter), f:11@6 sec., f:5.6@2 sec, & f:4.0@1 sec.
The f:5.6 photo got hit with a burst of low angle sunlight just as I made the exposure...
The f:4.0 photo was on old pebble surface paper, for a bit of extra "character". (Sorry for the light leaks).
15 minutes in Ansco 130, diluted 1+15, plus 5 ml/liter of print developing restrainer for longer developing time & better contrast control.

166129 166130 166131

The Lens here…
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?139615-Two-250mm-Wollaston-Meniscus-Lenses

Reinhold
www.re-inventedPhotoEquip.com

[xkaes]

I've got a lot of material around here on paper negatives from Peteren's, Darkroom Techniques, books, etc. Results vary depending on many things, like those already mentioned, but also the type/size of fibers -- if any -- in the paper. And make sure you DON'T use a paper that has a company imprint on the backside.

[Mkillmer]

11x14 Paper negative with simple lighting - negative suffered badly from Bromide drag rendering it unusable for contact printing. but it scanned OK.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4224/34753740571_27f6bedf94_z_d.jpg

[Emil Schildt]

Danish actress Vigga Bro...

13x18 cm paper negatives.
Cooke 3.5

[Pete Oakley]

Thank God, you're back on large format. Digital is the Devils work!

[Emil Schildt]

Thank God, you're back on large format. Digital is the Devils work!

never left... ;)

[dasBlute]

beautiful work, great rapport with the subject, she literally glows

[Emil Schildt]

Just LOVE that Cooke lens....

a couple of students from China

[Reinhold Schable]

A nearby Playground was a perfect place to play with my 500mm f:6.9 Wollaston meniscus lens.
Shot at f:14 on 8x10 Photo Warehouse RC/VC paper. No filter. 1+20 Dektol

167841

The lens is here…
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?140498-335-4-6-amp-500-6-9-Soft-Focus-Wollaston-Meniscus-Lenses

Reinhold

[knuf]

fomaspeed 311s, fkd 18x24, industar-37, 300mm @ f8, natural + artificial light

168419

[Randy]

fomaspeed 311s, fkd 18x24, industar-37, 300mm @ f8, natural + artificial lightQuite amazing.

[stawastawa]

Knuf,
Wonderful tones, neat, pose, interesting subject, neat plane of focus.
~n

[knuf]

fomaspeed 311s, linhof super technika 9x12, fujinon 300mm @ f5.6, natural + artificial light

169239

[chrism]

fomaspeed 311s, linhof super technika 9x12, fujinon 300mm @ f5.6, natural + artificial light

169239

That's really nice! What ISO do you rate the Fomaspeed at?

[chrism]

Chamonix 10x8, Nikkor 300mm/f9 @f64, 30 seconds, Galaxy Hyperspeed Paper pre-flashed for four seconds through blank white paper in front of the lens, ISO100, Ilford Multigrade Developer, Epson V850 scan:

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4364/37025971325_9b5a0881d3_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/YpRMiX)
Best Nikons Ever (https://flic.kr/p/YpRMiX) by chrism229 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrism229/), on Flickr

C.

[bcli]

Love this tonality - hard to accomplish with the paper. Nicely done.

[Emil Schildt]

just a simpel portrait.. (13x18)

[Martin Aislabie]

just a simpel portrait.. (13x18)

V nice

There is nothing simple about photographs of this quality Emil

Martin

[moizak]

Been a while since I posted anything. Actually, it's been a while since I did any analogue photography!

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4470/36905650573_c53567a066_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/Yee79e)
Adnan (https://flic.kr/p/Yee79e) by Moiz Abdulkader (https://www.flickr.com/photos/moiz/), on Flickr

[Louis Pacilla]

Been a while since I posted anything. Actually, it's been a while since I did any analogue photography!

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4470/36905650573_c53567a066_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/Yee79e)
Adnan (https://flic.kr/p/Yee79e) by Moiz Abdulkader (https://www.flickr.com/photos/moiz/), on Flickr

Well from this wonderful portrait it looks as though you should keep it going. Really thoughtful expression on his little face

[moizak]

Thank you Louis.

[gtoffoli]

Very very nice Emil.



just a simpel portrait.. (13x18)

[moizak]

So something a little different today, a reverse processed paper negative to produce a direct positive. It still needs a bit of work but I was pretty happy with this so thought I'd share.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4488/37601757056_75e13984a1_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ZhJQm9)
Reversal Process Test 2 (https://flic.kr/p/ZhJQm9) by Moiz Abdulkader (https://www.flickr.com/photos/moiz/), on Flickr

[Randy]

Excellent! ^

[moizak]

Excellent! ^

Thank you. :)

[dodphotography]

Any tips on determining an ISO speed for paper? I was trying to make some today on Ilford Warmtone RC and was struggling with a starting base ISO.

[paulbarden]

Any tips on determining an ISO speed for paper? I was trying to make some today on Ilford Warmtone RC and was struggling with a starting base ISO.

4 ASA is a reasonable starting point.

[Emil Schildt]

Any tips on determining an ISO speed for paper? I was trying to make some today on Ilford Warmtone RC and was struggling with a starting base ISO.

I'd guess about 6

BUT if you change to FOMA RC paper, the iso is nearer to 10-12...

[Dhuiting]

Just curious, has anyone making paper negatives felt like the paper isn't as sharp as a regular negative would be?
I've read the other differences (like the ostensible orthochromatic-ness of it) but haven't seen any sharpness comparison.

[moizak]

Another couple from me, these ones souped in day old Caffenol-C

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4504/36979877464_f2eb892afb_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/YkMxdd)
Abdemanaf I (https://flic.kr/p/YkMxdd)

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4461/36979879164_f0cf5f2c1d_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/YkMxHw)
Abdemanaf II (https://flic.kr/p/YkMxHw) by Moiz Abdulkader (https://www.flickr.com/photos/moiz/), on Flickr

[Emil Schildt]

LUCA - paper negative - 18x24cm

Gandolfi Precision - Boyer Saphir 300 4.5

[moizak]

LUCA - paper negative - 18x24cm

Gandolfi Precision - Boyer Saphir 300 4.5

Hi Emil,

Would love to know a little more about your lighting technique, exposure times etc......have you posted any info elsewhere?

[moizak]

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4459/37921323462_629c74b53f_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ZLYGiL)

Birds (https://flic.kr/p/ZLYGiL) by Moiz Abdulkader (https://www.flickr.com/photos/moiz/), on Flickr

Testing out a new lens

[Emil Schildt]

sure - just make it simple:

White wall - one light at a slight angle in front of her - another light behind her, opposite side of the front light...

Due to the distance to the wall, it gets a nice grey tone.

I use flash - full power at F4.5 (would like to have a more powerful flash though).

I use FOMA paper as they tend to be a little more sensitive than say, Ilford...



Hi Emil,

Would love to know a little more about your lighting technique, exposure times etc......have you posted any info elsewhere?

[moizak]

sure - just make it simple:

White wall - one light at a slight angle in front of her - another light behind her, opposite side of the front light...

Due to the distance to the wall, it gets a nice grey tone.

I use flash - full power at F4.5 (would like to have a more powerful flash though).

I use FOMA paper as they tend to be a little more sensitive than say, Ilford...

Thank you :)

[altb44]

New here...but thought I'd post an image from a paper negative, 5 x 7 field camera. 171552

[-88-]

13x18 cm FKD + industar 51. Very old Agfa grade2 paper.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4496/24320393948_4a43941fd4_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/D47nP3)Cherry Jo Candie (https://flic.kr/p/D47nP3) by Jukka (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jalakanen/), on Flickr

[John Olsen]

New here...but thought I'd post an image from a paper negative, 5 x 7 field camera. 171552

I really like the colorizing treatment. What did you do for that?

[altb44]

I brought in the color with filters in Lightroom. The paper was developed in Caffenol-C which I think also affected the color.

[Andrew Plume]

Hi Anne

I like it a lot and can see your 'painting influence(s) too

Good luck and regards

Andre

[altb44]

Thank you

[-88-]

13x18 cm FKD + industar 51

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4527/26514239029_f0d9e0c3fb.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/GoYpwe)2017-11-08-0004 copy (https://flic.kr/p/GoYpwe) by Jukka (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jalakanen/), on Flickr

[jon.oman]

13x18 cm FKD + industar 51

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4527/26514239029_f0d9e0c3fb.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/GoYpwe)2017-11-08-0004 copy (https://flic.kr/p/GoYpwe) by Jukka (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jalakanen/), on Flickr

Well done!

[tonyowen]

Perhaps a silly question, perhaps not.
Does anyone use flash when taking a [paper negative] image?
If so, how do they compute the GN for the assumed paper ISO.
I reduce the flash gun GN by 4 fold from 30 [iSO100, metres] to 7.5 for an assumed ISO of 6.
BUT all I get is a black image.
regards
Tony

[Emil Schildt]

all the time... but as I have no idea what GN is I can't help you there...

I use my flash full power - iso close to 12...
works like a charm



Perhaps a silly question, perhaps not.
Does anyone use flash when taking a [paper negative] image?
If so, how do they compute the GN for the assumed paper ISO.
I reduce the flash gun GN by 4 fold from 30 [iSO100, metres] to 7.5 for an assumed ISO of 6.
BUT all I get is a black image.
regards
Tony

[tonyowen]

I use my flash full power - iso close to 12...works like a charm
What flash, what typically is flash to subject distance ?
- I'm grasping at straws, trying to comprehend problem

regards

Tony

[Jimi]

Tony,

if all you get is a black image - try to move the flash further away from the paper, to lessen the strength of the output. Another way is to "pre-flash" it in the enlarger, if you have one.

Here is some general pointers - https://pinholeblender.wordpress.com/2013/01/12/pre-flashed-paper-negatives-for-pinhole-photography/ - but I guess there is a bunch of others, more or less complicated.

[tonyowen]

Tony, if all you get is a black image - try to move the flash further away from the paper
Agreed, but I do not understand why it is happening.
For film the GN of a flashgun lowers for a ISO rating less that 100, and then, in manual setting, the distance and f# are determined - for that film speed.
This is exactly what I am doing for paper negatives. I 've assumed ISO6 for paper, therefore my flash's GN drops from 30 to 7.5.
At an aperture of f5.6 this gives a flash to subject distance of 1.34m. I set the speed to 1/60s and the lens on the X setting
Yet when I'm in the region of 1.5m to 2m from the subject I get a totally black image instead of an reasonably exposed image.
I'm obviously missing something and it is this I'm trying to determine.
Any and all help welcome
regards
Tony

[Randy]

Tony, this doesn't make sense to me, getting a completely black paper neg with the numbers you are giving just sounds to me that the problem lies somewhere other than what you have stated as the GN, flash distance, and aperture. It looks like your calculations are correct, which would indicate that the paper is or has been exposed to light at some other step in the process.

[JoeV]

Tony, there's little to no reciprocity failure with paper negatives. I don't understand the part where you say the guide number for film lowers for ISO below 100. The guide number is related to the flash output power. Are you implying your flash only indicates no lower than ISO 100? Then try extrapolation down to ISO 6 - what is it, 5 stops or so? Just assume the guide number stays constant and figure your exposure directly to your ISO. By assuming a lower guide number for sub-100 ISOs, you're effectively over-exposing.

[tonyowen]

Tony, I don't understand the part where you say the guide number for film lowers for ISO below 100. The guide number is related to the flash output power. Then try extrapolation down to ISO 6 - what is it, 5 stops or so? Just assume the guide number stays constant and figure your exposure directly to your ISO. By assuming a lower guide number for sub-100 ISOs, you're effectively over-exposing.

The dial/display on my flash guns shows if a film has a different ISO to 100 then the guide number increases/decreases proportionally. For instance, at ISO 100 (on one flash) I get the display of f2@15m (GN 30) if I change the dial/display to ISO 50 then I get the display of f2@7.5m (GN 15) Conversely if I go to ISO 400 the display shows f4@15 (GN 60). I'm assuming that the same changes also relate to paper negative. So for ISO6 the GN is 7.5 - which at f2 gives flash to subject distance of 3.75m. You are correct that the difference is 5 stops. Also it is all related the intensity of light decreasing by the square root of the increase in distance [decrease in ISO number). I just happen to prefer using a modified GN for calculations.

regards

Tont

[JoeV]

I confess I haven't done a lot of work with flash and paper negatives (but plenty with paper negatives in daylight). But here's a thought, crazy as it might sound.

The spectrum of light output by flash is probably a fairly narrow bandwidth of blue light, daylight balanced (the narrowness of bandwidth is an assumption, but sounds reasonable to me given how flash tubes work). The guide numbers are intended for panchromatic film, which are sensitive to a wide spectrum, from red to blue, but with flash-only illumination are only being lit by this narrow spectrum of blue light.

Now take the case of blue-sensitive-only paper being exposed by mainly blue flash. It's possible that its sensitivity would be similar to that of the blue spectrum of panchromatic film - ignoring the green/yellow/red end of panchromatic film's sensitivity.

Which implies you should try exposing the paper as if its ISO were similar to panchromatic film. Try ISO 100 to start, and go from there.

~Joe

[maltfalc]

I confess I haven't done a lot of work with flash and paper negatives (but plenty with paper negatives in daylight). But here's a thought, crazy as it might sound.

The spectrum of light output by flash is probably a fairly narrow bandwidth of blue light, daylight balanced (the narrowness of bandwidth is an assumption, but sounds reasonable to me given how flash tubes work). The guide numbers are intended for panchromatic film, which are sensitive to a wide spectrum, from red to blue, but with flash-only illumination are only being lit by this narrow spectrum of blue light.

Now take the case of blue-sensitive-only paper being exposed by mainly blue flash. It's possible that its sensitivity would be similar to that of the blue spectrum of panchromatic film - ignoring the green/yellow/red end of panchromatic film's sensitivity.

Which implies you should try exposing the paper as if its ISO were similar to panchromatic film. Try ISO 100 to start, and go from there.

~Joea flash is about as close to the spectrum of sunlight as you can get among light sources commonly used by photographers. i can't imagine how you came up with the idea that a flash puts out blue light when anyone who's seen one go off can tell it puts out white light.

[plaubel]

Recently I took a dummy and started with new to me paper negatives.
Please excuse the bad quality of my test prints:

172588
172589

[IanBarber]

When developing paper negatives in stray, are you developing by inspection under the safe light or are you developing to time?

I use Ilford MG developer diluted to 1:18 and I make up 300ml of total chemistry. I am scanning these and so far I have been snatching the negative from the developer when I think it looks right but not sure if this is the right approach.

I do find that they look low in contrast and not sure if thats to do with the way I am developing them or the fact that the developer may be going off. I only develop 1 or 2 at a time and then bottle the developer, remove the air and leave it until next time.

Any advice would be appreciated.

[Emil Schildt]

When developing paper negatives in stray, are you developing by inspection under the safe light or are you developing to time?

I use Ilford MG developer diluted to 1:18 and I make up 300ml of total chemistry. I am scanning these and so far I have been snatching the negative from the developer when I think it looks right but not sure if this is the right approach.

I do find that they look low in contrast and not sure if thats to do with the way I am developing them or the fact that the developer may be going off. I only develop 1 or 2 at a time and then bottle the developer, remove the air and leave it until next time.

Any advice would be appreciated.

I always develop by inspection - I use Tetenal Eukobrom 1:9 for most papers.
Whether the negative seems thin or not have two "solutions":

1: if looking thin, you can scan it and be surprised how much info you can get from it - but it can be difficult to use as a real negative.
2: "normal" looking is the opposite "problem"

If too thin, try to use a filter in front of the lens (ex multigrade filter 3) and remember to overexpose about 1 stop.

Hint: I have tried many types of papers (RC) for this, and in my experience FOMA rules that world - simply as it seems you can leave your paper for a longer time and thereby get a "deeper" development...

[IanBarber]

I always develop by inspection - I use Tetenal Eukobrom 1:9 for most papers.
Whether the negative seems thin or not have two "solutions":

1: if looking thin, you can scan it and be surprised how much info you can get from it - but it can be difficult to use as a real negative.
2: "normal" looking is the opposite "problem"

If too thin, try to use a filter in front of the lens (ex multigrade filter 3) and remember to overexpose about 1 stop.

Hint: I have tried many types of papers (RC) for this, and in my experience FOMA rules that world - simply as it seems you can leave your paper for a longer time and thereby get a "deeper" development...


Is the Foam paper single or multi-grade

[Emil Schildt]

Is the Foam paper single or multi-grade

you can get both...

Fomaspeed Variant RC

[JoeV]

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4567/24970857138_abc8f8b990_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/E3AaRC)P1030658a (https://flic.kr/p/E3AaRC) by Joe Van Cleave (https://www.flickr.com/photos/31285363@N07/), on Flickr

Grade 2 RC paper, pre-flashed, Intrepid 4x5, Fujinon 135/5.6 lens. Rio Grande north of Albuquerque.

[Tin Can]

Nice work Joe, is that reversal, scan or what?

From reading just now, your 'Typewriter' review and the recon report I figure it's a contact print. Good writing too!

[JoeV]

Randy, this was rephotographed using a Panasonic m4/3 with the negative in a 4x5 enlarger Negative carrier and copy stand LED lights, then inverted and adjusted in SilkyPix. The Panasonic camera was handheld with OIS turned on. The result is better than what I've gotten with an Epson flatbed scanner.

[Tin Can]

Looks good and I would never have guessed all that!

[-88-]

Agfa Brovira 3
fkd 5x7 + industar-51

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4576/38981580511_96edf29bee_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/22oEMMH)Lorelai Blue (https://flic.kr/p/22oEMMH) by Jukka (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jalakanen/), on Flickr

[banana_legs]

Hi Tony and Ian,

I did some quite extensive testing a few years ago of VC paper that was developed to completion (i.e. not pulled early from the developer) under a wide range of lighting conditions, so that I could use paper negatives for pinhole as well as in my view cameras. For pinhole, the reciprocity failure has to be accounted for, so I wanted to work out a compensation equation; I also tried using flash. I also use graded paper, and there I have had good success in 'over exposing' by a few stops but then pulling the print early in development; the reciprocity behaviour and 'base ISO' of the VC paper seems quite similar for the graded papers I have when dev to completion, but I guess there may be more variability with grade and brand. I usually use VC and development to completion now though as it means I can develop negatives in tubes rather than trays.

For the development to completion process with Ilford MGIV VC paper (I have had very similar results with a VC Fotospeed paper too), I use Fotospeed PD5 paper developer at the normal 1+9 dilution and develop fully at about 20 degrees Centigrade (well, between 10 degrees to 26 degrees so far with no dreadful changes in the negs); I have found sometimes trying to pull a VC negative early can risk a 'mottled' effect on the print that seems to be some form of uneven development, so I only run to completion now. I have used a few other developers too, and as long as you leave them go to completion, they have all worked fine. I choose my paper rating based on the dynamic range of the scene (lightest to darkest tone), usually measured using my compact digital camera as a light meter, and have the option of shooting with or without a yellow filter as the VC paper has a fast layer that responds to blue, and a slower layer that responds to green light. With the response of the VC paper towards the blue/green end, the effective speed can vary a bit too depending on the colour of the objects you are shooting which is an added 'feature'. To help prevent loss of shadow detail, I always pre-flash my paper now and the details below assume the paper is pre-flashed. I pre-flash so that the paper will go *just* off-white when developed, the preflashed paper seems to store for months with no degradation of the pre-flash effect, so I flash a decent batch of paper at a time.

In daylight on pre-flashed Ilford MGIV VC paper with no lens filters, I shoot treating the paper speed as an equivalent of ISO 20, and get +/- 2 1/2 stops of usable range (5 stop total range of tones). With a yellow filter (e.g. Cokin 001) in front of the lens (or behind the pinhole depending on the camera) so that only the green layer of the VC paper is active, I rate the paper at ISO 6 and get +/- 4 stops of range, going quite non-linear in the highlights. The yellow filter is great as I can capture both shadow detail and clouds in the one shot. For incandescent light, reduce the equivalent ISO by a further 1 1/2 stops; the dynamic range will also increase a little to +/- 4 1/2 stops if you use a yellow filter too as there is very little blue content to excite the faster layer in the variable contrast paper. If you want more startling effects, do not flash the paper and in daylight try ISO 8 (with yellow filter), but be prepared for only +/- 2 stops of dynamic range and shadows/ highlights that clip really fast.

For pinhole, the reciprocity failure can be very significant. I spent many hours of swearing developing an equation to allow me to adjust the times; I have tested it with a 7 hour exposure and it is not perfect, but close enough. As reciprocity failure becomes significant, the negatives also get more contrasty as the dynamic range reduces. The correction I use is described by the equation:

t_s = t_c + 0.0009 ( t_c^2.2304)

where t_c is the time in seconds that the exposure table says you should use, and t_s is the exposure time you should actually give the paper. For t_c = 8 seconds (or less), you can assume that there is no failure. At t_c=16 seconds, the equation says use t_s = 16.4 seconds; near enough. for a t_c = 60 sec, t_s = 68 seconds, so no real issues. However the failure effect appears rapidly, so at t_c= 16 minutes, t_s=83 minutes(over an hour!).

For really bright conditions and a lensed camera, I have found shutter speeds to 1/100 sec work fine with rating the paper as ISO 6 (or 20 if no yellow filter), but there is a bit of "reciprocity failure" that starts to be noticeable again from about 1/250 of a second and faster; and the apparent reciprocity failure is pretty bad at the speeds you get with a flashgun so the negative is much thinner than you may initially expect. Different flashguns seem to 'pop' for different lengths of time, and the variability in time seems to be a key important factor; flash power control is achieved by quenching the light output early of course that complicates measurements further. Of the flashguns I tried (set to manual flash, not auto and with 'equivalent' GN setup), the one with the really short bright flash gave a much thinner negative than the one with the longer not-so-bright output; but unless you have the kit to measure the length of the flash output time, it is not easy to tell by eye what your flash is actually doing.


Evan

[MMELVIS]

Computer Parts and an old Typewriter. Taken with a Gundlach Radar Extreme Wide Angle Anast. 8x10 6 1/4 inch (159mm) F16 , 4 minute exposure

173099

[chrism]

Chamonix 10x8, Schneider-Kreuznach Symmar-S 360mm/f6.8 @ f6.8, 1/8 second, one Impact strobe, Galaxy Hyperspeed paper at ISO 50, pre-flashed though plain printer paper (same exposure as for taking), Ilford MG developer, Epson V850 scan:

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4646/39288753462_ae35d32771_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/22RP8B5)
Thomas 10x8 (https://flic.kr/p/22RP8B5) by chrism229 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrism229/), on Flickr

Chris

[Randy]

Chamonix 10x8, Schneider-Kreuznach Symmar-S 360mm/f6.8 @ f6.8, 1/8 second, one Impact strobe, Galaxy Hyperspeed paper at ISO 50, pre-flashed though plain printer paper (same exposure as for taking)This is quite wonderful Chris - when you pre-flash thru printer paper, do you just hold the printer paper against the lens for the pre-exposure?

[chrism]

Yes, that's right, then recock the shutter and take the paper away for the final exposure. I also did one with the same exposure and no preflash, but the contrast is such that it would be hard to make it look good.

[JoeV]

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4731/39184494241_7f3ff8a817_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/22GALYi)P1000162a (https://flic.kr/p/22GALYi) by Joe Van Cleave (https://www.flickr.com/photos/31285363@N07/), on Flickr

Arista grade 2 RC semi-matte paper, pre-flashed, exposure 1/60 @ f/5.6. Intrepid 4x5, Fujinon 135.

~Joe

[JoeV]

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4682/25252096498_00c38d0a26_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/EtrAw7)Plant003 (1) (https://flic.kr/p/EtrAw7) by Joe Van Cleave (https://www.flickr.com/photos/31285363@N07/), on Flickr

Arista grade 2 RC glossy, pre-flashed, exposure 3 seconds at f/8. Intrepid 4x5, Fujinon 135.

~Joe

[ALVANDI Camera]

Iran, Tehran, Darabad, Panoral 57 camera (http://www.mr-alvandi.com/technique/panoral-57-camera.html), Schneider Super Angulon 90/5.6, Forte No.2 5x7in paper negative

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4633/39352361881_652bae26cf_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/22Xr9aX)

[chrism]

When two people have to sit through a few iterations of a 10x8 photo they don't look so good. Chamonix 10x8, Schneider-Kreuznach Symmar-S 360mm/f6.8, Galaxy Hyperspeed @ EI 50, preflashed though plain paper at same exposure as taking exposure, one Impact strobe and one Impact continuous CFT light, Ilford MG Developer, Epson V850 scan:

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4634/25564935008_b843b40ff0_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/EX5Yvw)
Canadian Gothic (https://flic.kr/p/EX5Yvw) by chrism229 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrism229/), on Flickr

Stick a pitchfork in it and it would be done.

[Yansfotos1]

Hi everyone,
I’ve been reading this thread (not completely though, I’m on Page 35 at the moment ;) ) and I’m so grateful for all of you sharing your experiences and tips on paper negatives, thank you!
Some time ago I started working with wet plates and got some very nice results. Lately, I’ve been neglecting this branch of my photography because of the very tedious process which I still like, but time being a valuable commodity what with my young family and so on, I rarely find two hours to dabble in the cellar. But I have this wonderful old German 18x24 camera I acquired for the wet plates which doesn’t get the use it deserves so I thought paper negatives were a great way to get to use the camera (along with LF benefits of course) without spending either much time preparing the darkroom for wet plate use or spending large amounts of money to buy 18x24 film. So, I found this thread and thought I’d give it a go. I have a big stock of old paper (Ilford MG IV, RC) in 13x18 and 18x24 so this is what I used.

173255

This is my first ever paper negative, Ilford MG IV RC 13x18 cm not pre-flashed, shot on a Hoh & Hahne camera, Zeiss Tessar 300mm f4.5 wide open, two YN560 flashes at full power in a softbox, developed in N113, scanned and inverted in PS. I didn’t meter anything, just thought I needed tons of light, so the light was right in his face =)
I think it turned out quite alright though the position of the light could have been better and it’s a little dark. So, after this initial test I would like to get some consistency into the workflow. I needed to know what speed the paper would be when using strobe light what the dynamic range of the paper was, so I did an exposure test. The setup: Ilford MG IV RC 13x18 cm not pre-flashed, no filters, camera about 3 m away from a white wall, flash aimed at the wall from about camera axis. I assumed an ISO of 6, metered exposure with a spot meter and took bellows extension into account (0.5 stops). I exposed from -3 to +3 stops in small stripes, moving the darkslide for each flash pop, developed and scanned the negative.

173256

First of all, I think ISO 6 might have been bang on for this paper. The -3 exposure is just about paper white on the negative and the +3 is almost blocked up, it’s hard to see on the image but when I adjust the levels in PS I can still see the pattern of the wallpaper in both exposures, albeit very faintly. So, I think the paper is able to produce some good results from -2.5 to 2.5, giving me a usable dynamic range of 4 stops. But I was surprised I got 7 stops of exposure to show up.
I think for the next negatives I can rate the paper at ISO 6, put the skin tones in +1 and see if it all works out. Also, I learnt that I need more light. So a 1200 Ws strobe it is.

Do you think my conclusions are correct? If you have any thoughts about my test please let me know, also if I have made any mistakes, always eager to learn!

Please excuse my rambling and the long post, I just wanted to give something back to this thread and share my experiences just in case this is interesting or useful for anyone and I apologise if this is old hat to you :o

Yannick

[cuypers1807]

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4736/38681033024_1be3f655c9_c.jpg
8x10 paper negative from a 20x20 cardboard box camera built to test out a Besseler 18" Series III projector lens.

Focusing without a ground glass was a challenge:
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4682/38511279955_ef9fc8a46e_n.jpg

[banana_legs]

Hi Yannick,
Very interesting! In tests of Ilford VC with longer exposures (i.e. not short flash exposures) without preflashing the paper or using filters I found I could get about 4.5 stops as quite close to a straight-line exposure behaviour (when plotted on the usual log axes), and then another 3 stops in a very non-linear compressed top end (i.e. the dark regions of the negative, highlights when printed). The range seems to match quite well with what you have seen with the flash. The printed shadows (i.e. white on the negative) was a sharp cut-off behaviour. With a yellow filter so that the blue layer was not active, but still no pre-flashing, the dynamic range in the 'linear' region was about 4 stops, but there was about 4 stops or so in the non-linear printed highlights. There was still a very sharp cut-off to paper-white on the negative. Some of the early graphs are still visible on f295 at http://www.f295.org/main/showthread.php?13568-Latest-calibration-of-VC-paper-negatives&p=88258&viewfull=1#post88258.

With pre-flashing, the curves are 'pulled up' from the cut-off zone and then there is a much wider dynamic range available, albeit rather non-linear at times.

Best regards, Evan

[cplkao]

Hi Yannick,

Welcome to the wonderful world of paper negative! I also shoot wet plate but spent most of my time shooting paper negative, same reason as you, doesn't take too much time. I shoot Ilford MG IV RC paper 8x10

I rated my paper ISO 3, and rather than pre-flash my paper, I post flashed it before develop them. I use a Packard shutter so its not always consistent but I develop my inspecting under the safe light (the best thing about paper negative is that you can run all your workflow under safelight).



173603

[John Olsen]

Hi Yannick,

Welcome to the wonderful world of paper negative!

173603

Great shot, frightening composition -congratulations.

[cplkao]

Thanks John, that was a good collaboration between me and her!

[Yansfotos1]

Nice work Lucas!

Evan, thank you for your reply, I've been reading up on your research regarding paper negatives and dynamic range. You are far ahead of me, very interesting work thank you!

I've been practising a bit more hands on in the last few days. I did a few portrait sessions with the 18x24 and newly acquired strobe. My calculations above seem to be somewhat accurate, I had no trouble metering skintone @ ISO 12 f11 and putting in at +1. Developed by inspection and scanned the negative:

173608
Thanks to Peter for enduring a 1200 Ws supernova going off in his face ;)

I also went out and took a picture of Aachen Cathedral (the town where I live) and learned that even overcast weather seems to have a higher amount of blue light compared to my indoor strobe test which I found a bit surprising. I overshot exposure and development on the first sheet but was able to dial it back on the second by diluting the dev and stopping development early.

173609

I'm still quite amazed at the resolution I'm getting from the scans and the beaten up Tessar I use. No complaints there =)

[Randy]

and the beaten up Tessar I use. No complaints there =)Everyone knows Tessars perform better after a few impacts with the ground.

[cplkao]

Simon
2017
Paper Negative
Wollensak Vesta

173865

[IanBarber]

Ilford Paper ISO 5 60 second exposure

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4659/39067334364_6e53ee45a6_o.jpg

[glerin]

Hi,

this is my first post here, first shot with LF camera (8x10 DIY), first use of paper as negative and first use of caffenol with paper :D
8x10 DIY box camera, Fomaspeed 311N RC, caffenol C-M

173890

[Chris7521]

Some good stuff here. I have to try paper negs sometime!

[animaux]

174085 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/animaux/26025262288/in/dateposted-public/)

Yard of the Hotel Elephant, Weimar, Germany.

Sinar F-based fixed focus camera
Fujinon SWD 75/5.6@5.6
Ilford MGIV Paper Negative 9×12cm
preflashed (possibly too short)
Caffenol-CM

Sorry for the dusty scan.

[jon.oman]

Ilford Paper ISO 5 60 second exposure

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4659/39067334364_6e53ee45a6_o.jpg

I like this image!

[Emil Schildt]

Cooke series IIa 3.5

13x18 (cropped)

[gtoffoli]

wow


Cooke series IIa 3.5

13x18 (cropped)

[pepeguitarra]

Any body knows where to buy the Ilford Harman paper in 4x5? I cannot find it.

[MAubrey]

Any body knows where to buy the Ilford Harman paper in 4x5? I cannot find it.
Is it out of stock again already??? They just got new stock at B&H back in December. We had been waiting for six months or more.

[jnantz]

Nice work Lucas!

Evan, thank you for your reply, I've been reading up on your research regarding paper negatives and dynamic range. You are far ahead of me, very interesting work thank you!

I've been practising a bit more hands on in the last few days. I did a few portrait sessions with the 18x24 and newly acquired strobe. My calculations above seem to be somewhat accurate, I had no trouble metering skintone @ ISO 12 f11 and putting in at +1. Developed by inspection and scanned the negative:

173608
Thanks to Peter for enduring a 1200 Ws supernova going off in his face ;)

I also went out and took a picture of Aachen Cathedral (the town where I live) and learned that even overcast weather seems to have a higher amount of blue light compared to my indoor strobe test which I found a bit surprising. I overshot exposure and development on the first sheet but was able to dial it back on the second by diluting the dev and stopping development early.

173609

I'm still quite amazed at the resolution I'm getting from the scans and the beaten up Tessar I use. No complaints there =)

Yansfotos1 great stuff !
yeah overcast days are the best ..

[animaux]

Two test images. (I really need a grid on my ground glass :)

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4710/39354868374_d422ff4422_z_d.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/animaux/39354868374/in/dateposted-public/)

Frauenplan Weimar, Germany

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4606/28286155559_f06e6365fd_z_d.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/animaux/28286155559/in/dateposted-public/)

Brauhausgasse Weimar, Germany

-----

Both Sinar F with DIY 8×10 Back
Fujinon NW 210mm/5.6
Ilford MG IV 18×24*cm
Dev. in Caffenol-CM

[ALVANDI Camera]

Iran, Tehran, Darabad, Panoral 57 camera (http://www.mr-alvandi.com/technique/panoral-57-camera.html), Schneider Super Angulon 90/5.6, Forte No.2 5x7in paper negative

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4653/25490308757_038f88a295_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/EQuuJ2)

[Jimi]

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4606/28286155559_f06e6365fd_z_d.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/animaux/28286155559/in/dateposted-public/)

Brauhausgasse Weimar, Germany

-----

Both Sinar F with DIY 8×10 Back
Fujinon NW 210mm/5.6
Ilford MG IV 18×24*cm
Dev. in Caffenol-CM

Really love the feeling of this one, Animaux. I would love to see a photography of the DIY back for the Sinar too, just as an aside.

[animaux]

Really love the feeling of this one, Animaux. I would love to see a photography of the DIY back for the Sinar too, just as an aside.

Tack så mycket, Jimi! I have a few pictures of building it in a flickr album (https://www.flickr.com/photos/animaux/albums/72157691241924251).

[Jimi]

Tack så mycket, Jimi! I have a few pictures of building it in a flickr album (https://www.flickr.com/photos/animaux/albums/72157691241924251).

Vielen Dank. Alexander! :) Sieht sehr gut aus. I have to figure out and build something similar eventually for my Norma.

[animaux]

It’s not really hard if you use the basis of a Norma or F-standard. The only tricky part is to get the distance to the ground glass right. Just E-Mail me if you have any questions.

[animaux]

175666

@flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/animaux/38868049290/)

Sinar F w/ DIY 8×10 Back
Fujinon NW 210mm/5.6
Ilford MG IV 18×24*cm
Dev. in Caffenol-CM

[russyoung]

Beautiful image, Ian Barber. Reminds me in a very positive way of A Horsely Hinton but none of his were this fine IMHO.

Russ Young

[IanBarber]

Tulip and Water

Ilford MG RC Paper rated at ISO 4 and developed by inspection in Ilford MG developer

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4776/39953941725_58a02f7ccf_b.jpg

[Tin Can]

Very nice!

[ajmiller]

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/798/39116953580_217355dd90_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/22ACBu9)Belmont, Wrelton, North Yorkshire (https://flic.kr/p/22ACBu9) by Anthony Miller (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156884241@N07/), on Flickr

Bender 10x8 self-assembly camera;
Hermagis 310mm No.5 brass lens;
Paper negative;
Contact printed on MGIV RC WT paper;

[NedL]

Bender 10x8 self-assembly camera;...

Well done, Tony.

[pepeguitarra]

I was so happy with my 4x5 before reading this long thread. Now, I have to buy an 8x10 to shoot on Paper Negative.

[ajmiller]

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/891/26452829577_bae055891e_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/GixECz)St. Gregorys Minster, Kirkdale, North Yorkshire (https://flic.kr/p/GixECz) by Anthony Miller (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ajmillerphoto/), on Flickr

Bender 10x8 self assembly camera:
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 250mm;
Paper negative
Contact printed on MGIV RC WT paper;
Old ST-20 Sepia Toned;

[Tin Can]

Wow, I really like it!

[Louis Pacilla]

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/891/26452829577_bae055891e_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/GixECz)St. Gregorys Minster, Kirkdale, North Yorkshire (https://flic.kr/p/GixECz) by Anthony Miller (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ajmillerphoto/), on Flickr

Bender 10x8 self assembly camera:
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 250mm;
Paper negative
Contact printed on MGIV RC WT paper;
Old ST-20 Sepia Toned;

Just lovely & a truly vintage look w/ a fairly direct path. Many seem to seek it. Great job!

[NedL]

Bender 10x8 self assembly camera:
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 250mm;
Paper negative
Contact printed on MGIV RC WT paper;
Old ST-20 Sepia Toned;

This is excellent!

[Martin Aislabie]

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/891/26452829577_bae055891e_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/GixECz)St. Gregorys Minster, Kirkdale, North Yorkshire (https://flic.kr/p/GixECz) by Anthony Miller (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ajmillerphoto/), on Flickr

Bender 10x8 self assembly camera:
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 250mm;
Paper negative
Contact printed on MGIV RC WT paper;
Old ST-20 Sepia Toned;

I love this church - its just such a shame I've never managed to produce such a nice shot as this.

Nice one Tony

Martin

[ajmiller]

Thank you for your comments. It’s a lovely place and the cemetery has the grave of Herbert Read- knight, anarchist & poet and North Yorkshireman! Cheers.

[aclark]

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/891/26452829577_bae055891e_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/GixECz)St. Gregorys Minster, Kirkdale, North Yorkshire (https://flic.kr/p/GixECz) by Anthony Miller (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ajmillerphoto/), on Flickr

Bender 10x8 self assembly camera:
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 250mm;
Paper negative
Contact printed on MGIV RC WT paper;
Old ST-20 Sepia Toned;

Hi Tony,
I really like this. The treatment suits the subject perfectly.

Alan

[Emil Schildt]

Cooke series IIa

13x18cm paper neg...

Model is Simone...

[animaux]

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/869/40875976504_6a253f558b_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/25h54HA)

Schnutenbaum in der Steubenstraße (https://flic.kr/p/25h54HA) by Alexander Rutz (https://www.flickr.com/photos/animaux/), on Flickr

Schneider Symmar-S 360mm/6.8
@ƒ8 1/4s
18x24cm Ilford MG IV
Caffenol-CM

[tonyowen]

I've acquired some old photographic papers and I'm asking if anyone knows their relative 'speed' for use as paper negatives.
I normally use Ilford Multigrcases Pearl for which I allocate ISO6 which seems about okay (for me)
The opened packs of paper [of which I do not know the quality or quantity] are:
1] Panalure F single weight
2] Bromesko paper 3 WFL3D
Without wishing to use up the paper in testing I'm after some best guesses as to whether they are faster or slower than the Multigrade and by how much.
regards
Tony

[Emil Schildt]

Yesterday our school had an "open house" where the guests could try many different things...

Among those guests this adorable girl wisited me...
Had to try to make her portrait and was amazed how easy she understood how to pose in front of a camera more than 100 years older than her....

She loved it!!

Meet Anna - aged 8...

(13x18 cm paper neg. Cooke series IIa F 3.5)

[Emil Schildt]

Sooo quiet in here....

anyway, here's Simone - love that face.

13x18cm Foma RC paper negative.

Cooke series IIa F3.5

[matt335]

Such a lovely image. Congrats. Her face is timeless and to me looks like from another era in time.

[Emil Schildt]

Such a lovely image. Congrats. Her face is timeless and to me looks like from another era in time.

Thanks - I do agree...

[Alex DiBacco]

First time doing a paper negative. Really enjoyable, and super easy.
I printed this one on different paper than I shot it. Details:

Paper negative shot on Oriental Seagull G-3 , 16 second exposure at f/5.6
Contact printed on expired Ilford Multigrade IV FB, using the bathroom light for about 5 seconds, developed in PF 130.

Camera was Calumet Cadet 4x5 with a Kodak Ektar 127mm

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1888/43529563615_3deced888a_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/29jyoHv)

[Emil Schildt]

VERY nice!

[JoeV]

Great image, well done.

I'm assuming you flashed the print to fill in shadows & reduce contrast?

~Joe

[Alex DiBacco]

VERY nice!

Thank you!


Great image, well done.

I'm assuming you flashed the print to fill in shadows & reduce contrast?

~Joe

Thanks!
Sorry, reading back I realize I wasn't clear, so I've edited that part.
The 5 second exposure with the bathroom light was how I made the contact print, rather than using light from an enlarger like I usually do.

[animaux]

Contact printed on expired Ilford Multigrade IV FB, using the bathroom light for about 5 seconds, developed in PF 130.

Thanks for sharing! Could you say how far away from the contact your bathroom light was, and how much Watt the buld has? This would make it easier to get a good starting point for my own contacts :)

[animaux]

To answer myself … for my bathroom it’s about 2 seconds with a diffuse 5W LED bulb in roughly 2,3m height.

[Alex DiBacco]

To answer myself … for my bathroom it’s about 2 seconds with a diffuse 5W LED bulb in roughly 2,3m height.

Glad you got it to work! Counter to ceiling height for me is about 6 feet I'd say, and the bulb is an 840 lumen LED bulb (about 60w tungsten equivalent) shooting through some pretty heavy plastic diffusion. Lots of variables as you can tell.

[animaux]

Glad you got it to work! Counter to ceiling height for me is about 6 feet I'd say, and the bulb is an 840 lumen LED bulb (about 60w tungsten equivalent) shooting through some pretty heavy plastic diffusion. Lots of variables as you can tell.

Thanks! There’s no way around testing, I guess. Good to have a starting point though.

[blue4130]

Something that I found works very well and extremely consistent is to use my canon flash, mounted on a stand and pointed at the ceiling. I set the power to 1/32 and then I can fire off a set number of pops to get the ammount of light I am after. Test strips are a breeze. One pop for each inch.

[James R. Kyle]

Don ...

Very VERY Fine work.

I am currently reading your Three postings of working with Paper Negatives.... Thank You for your great work of the explaining of this process. I have been working with Paper Negatives in LF Cameras now for three years. I Keep notes on my experiments = However = I keep stumbleing and have to start over as the papers I have (Kodabromide II RC, Polycontrast "F", and others have a little different ISO qualities. One I have tried has the high ISO of 100... I was "floored" by this... That paper is rather thin - and is used in Meatalogophy for making positives from X-Rays of welding test. I was iven about 200 8X10 sheets of this -- the paper is Kodak "INDUSTREX 620". Unbeleavable that I made an image at 100 ISO // f-11 // SS= 1/50th.... I used D-76+ two teaspoons of Sodium Bicarbonate to develop // Regular Stop and Fix. I do not make "contact prints" - but rather scan and do a little edits in CS-5. With doing that I do not have to make use of an enlarger, and can digital print up to - and perhaps larger - 20X30 Inches.

Thank you.

James R. Kyle

[Emil Schildt]

trying out my oldest lens...

Ross Petzval from about 1854...

I think I love it...

Hannah sat for me - 13x18cm paper negative

[James R. Kyle]

I make images using paper negatives, from time to time.

I can't find another thread about this, and I so would like to have a thread, where I can send my students (and other interested) to see what can be done in this way...

I know there's a lot of paper negatives around LF forum, but let's see them here.

Portraits - nudes - landscapes - still life's and so on.

I'll begin:

Kristina. 24x30cm negative. Ilex paragon soft focus lens.

http://www.apug.org/gallery1/files/4/8/8/7/kristina3.jpg

and Maj - same story..

http://www.apug.org/gallery1/files/4/8/8/7/maj2.jpg

=================

There are very few Paper Negative sites that are operating on the WWW...

I have a Facebook page that is for photographers who work with Paper Negatives. Some are using "Pinhole" cameras - I and others use 4X5 and 8X10 cameras with loading the paper into the film holders. This is good as you can travel about and not have to capture the image and go to a darkroom for the development.

IF you are NOT on Facebook - I can send to you some information as to the process that I am using.

Here is the Facebook page...

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1438777439673554/?ref=bookmarks

Here is my e-mail:

jamesrkyle@gmail.com

Thank you for reaching out.

P.S.= I teach as well :-)

[Fr. Mark]

About cameras for paper negatives: A few years ago I made a 5x8" pinhole camera for use with film or paper negatives following an idea I'd seen somewhere on the web where the original builder made the camera with two compartments: one for taking the picture with a built-in film holder, the other behind it and isolated from light where the unexposed and exposed stores of paper were kept. You use a piece of cardstock to keep the exposed pieces separate from the unexposed pieces. This requires a changing bag to make changes in the field. But the combination of camera and changing bag together weigh quite a bit less than my 300mm f5.6 lens for my Sinar P. I think paper negatives are a great way to learn and as an end to themselves, particularly in an era of scanners. I started with paper negatives and a pinhole camera at age 9 with a class taught out of the basement of one of the Smithsonian museums on the Mall in D.C. I re-found those negatives and reprinted them a couple years ago---some of them my 9 year old self had printed them the wrong way around (through the paper base) and was pleased to see them reasonably sharp! I wish I still had the camera, but it really wasn't anything special: just a cardboard school supplies box painted flat black inside (similar to a cigar box) and some electrical tape.

[John Earley]

It has been a while since I tried using paper negatives and previously my experience was very mixed. I had difficulty recreating useable exposures/contrast and there was a never-ending problem with paper dust. I decided to try again and with a more methodical approach. This is one of half a dozen test exposures. Dust is still a problem but I'm working on that and it isn't as bad as my previous attempts.

8x10 Ilford Multigrade, Nikon 300mm f9 wide open at 1 minute with an Ilford 00 Multigrade filter over the lens. No pre flash. Natural window light. Developed in Dektol. Scanned on an Epson V600, inverted in PhotoShop and adjusted in Lightroom.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1870/43713395125_c8408ac41f_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/29ANzqi)Paper neg trial-2 (https://flic.kr/p/29ANzqi) by JOHN EARLEY (https://www.flickr.com/photos/127392576@N03/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

About cameras for paper negatives: A few years ago I made a 5x8" pinhole camera for use with film or paper negatives following an idea I'd seen somewhere on the web where the original builder made the camera with two compartments: one for taking the picture with a built-in film holder, the other behind it and isolated from light where the unexposed and exposed stores of paper were kept. You use a piece of cardstock to keep the exposed pieces separate from the unexposed pieces. This requires a changing bag to make changes in the field. But the combination of camera and changing bag together weigh quite a bit less than my 300mm f5.6 lens for my Sinar P. I think paper negatives are a great way to learn and as an end to themselves, particularly in an era of scanners. I started with paper negatives and a pinhole camera at age 9 with a class taught out of the basement of one of the Smithsonian museums on the Mall in D.C. I re-found those negatives and reprinted them a couple years ago---some of them my 9 year old self had printed them the wrong way around (through the paper base) and was pleased to see them reasonably sharp! I wish I still had the camera, but it really wasn't anything special: just a cardboard school supplies box painted flat black inside (similar to a cigar box) and some electrical tape.

Please post those old prints!

[Alex DiBacco]

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1858/43997175894_32e584ff4e_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2a2T2yb)

The farm nearby finally opened up for apple picking, so me and my wife naturally had to go and spend too much money :)

Shot on Oriental Seagull G-3, turned positive in Photoshop.
Calumet Cadet 4x5 with a Kodak Ektar 127mm, 70 second exposure at f/5.6. Dev was 60 sec in PF130.

[John Earley]

8x10 Ilford Multigrade negative, R. Knoll f5.5/360mm, f25@6min, developed in Dektol. Scanned on V600, inverted in PS and minor adjustments in LR.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1978/31315336558_ba92c08701_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/PHehxQ)8x10 Ilford Multigrade Enlarging Paper Negative, R. Knoll f5.5-360 Doppel-Rigonar, Calumet C1 (https://flic.kr/p/PHehxQ) by JOHN EARLEY (https://www.flickr.com/photos/127392576@N03/), on Flickr
183156

[peter brooks]

Just made my first paper negs - what fun!

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1912/31866215458_950cd997b0_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/QxUFDU)
Cyclamen (https://flic.kr/p/QxUFDU) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)

Wood Canham, 300mm barrel Imagon with third disk (fully open), 56 seconds (7 x 8secs Sinar shutter!), natural light.
5x7 Multigrade IV, pre-flashed. Inverted in PS.

[peter brooks]

Does paper suffer from reciprocity? I'd like to do some early morning / late evening shots but with an ISO of 3 to 6 I'm a bit worried :)

I'm using Ilford Multigrade IV RC Glossy.

Thanks,
Peter

[Fr. Mark]

I think so, I think that reciprocity failure is an intrinsic property of the chemistry of the silver chloride/bromide in films and printing papers.

[donkittle]

Wow, James, I’ve never used paper that I was able to rate at 100. The best I experienced was Galaxy Hyperspeed paper which I rated at 24 (but Galaxy seems to be long gone). Hope you enjoyed the articles. I’m still learning too :)

[donkittle]

Peter, in my exposures I’ve never added any additional time for reciprocity and the images have always come out fine. My longest exposure was a little over 60 minutes but I routinely shoot exposures 1 or more minutes long.

[rjbuzzclick]

A couple of test shots with my new 4x5 Graflex RB Series B (scanned and inverted in PS).

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1967/43814884040_3aea448724_b.jpg

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1949/45632510311_f32d858d9a_b.jpg

[James R. Kyle]

I might be wrong - However I set my spot-meter at 100 ASA (ISO) and made a few test images. The best one was at f-11 1/50th of a second and ISO= 100. I was very surprised at the outcome. I think that this paper INDUSTRX is the fastest that I have aquired - and Now I Want MORE.

[koraks]

No paper will ever come close to ISO 100. That's just beyond the reach of a bromide emulsion.

[Louis Pacilla]

No paper will ever come close to ISO 100. That's just beyond the reach of a bromide emulsion.
+1

[peter brooks]

Peter, in my exposures I’ve never added any additional time for reciprocity and the images have always come out fine. My longest exposure was a little over 60 minutes but I routinely shoot exposures 1 or more minutes long.

Thanks Don. Yes, I have shot 4 mins / 8 mins around sunset since with no problem.

(Well the problem then becomes the reciprocity of the day, by 2/3rds through the exposure the EV had dropped by one and the exposure it should have had was exponentially longer :) )

[peter brooks]

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4904/45251102684_e913c6b470_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2bWFJiA)
Old track (https://flic.kr/p/2bWFJiA) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)

Canham 5x7, TTH RVP at f8, pre-flashed Ilford Mutigrade IV Glossy at ISO 3. A 15 second exposure at sunrise. Scan, inverted in PS.

I'm enjoying the 'top hat' style made possible by the slow paper speed. Bah! Who needs a shutter? (I do, most of the time...)

[Fr. Mark]

beautiful, where is it, approximately?

[James R. Kyle]

Oh!!! OK - Thank you for your input......

Perhaps this is "something" on the "Bumble Bee Theory" = I did not know that one could NOT do that.



I used a D-76 PLUS two tablespoons of Sodium Bicarbonate per gallon. Took about 2 minutes to develop.

184634

184635

((Now if I try this testing again it will not work at all :-( ))

[koraks]

That is quite remarkable indeed James! I understand it's Industrex 620 paper - something you don't usually come across. The relevant information dropped down a few pages, causing me to miss it initially. Apparently, the paper is/was intended for duplication as well as direct exposure, explaining its exceptionally high speed (for a paper). A very appealing niche product indeed if you're into making paper negs, nice find!

[peter brooks]

beautiful, where is it, approximately?

Thanks. North of England. The track is an enclosure road - enclosure happened quite late here, mid 1700's. There was a statutory width for the newly constructed roads (40ft I think). Of course some later became 'proper' surfaced roads.

[James R. Kyle]

That is quite remarkable indeed James! I understand it's Industrex 620 paper - something you don't usually come across. The relevant information dropped down a few pages, causing me to miss it initially. Apparently, the paper is/was intended for duplication as well as direct exposure, explaining its exceptionally high speed (for a paper). A very appealing niche product indeed if you're into making paper negs, nice find!

===============

I found it on E-Bay and I only have 50 - 8X10 sheets of this. I would like to find more. Using this paper allows one to almost stop motion - i.e. water, tree branch movments, people. It is, of course, a little bit grainy - much more than regular print papers.

Thank you... ;-)

[charleymeyer]

Not sure if yours is the same, but I have a pkg of Kodak Industrex xray film (MX125) I've yet to use. It is for industrial use and individual sheets comes in a paper sleeve.


I might be wrong - However I set my spot-meter at 100 ASA (ISO) and made a few test images. The best one was at f-11 1/50th of a second and ISO= 100. I was very surprised at the outcome. I think that this paper INDUSTRX is the fastest that I have aquired - and Now I Want MORE.

[Tin Can]

It comes many ways and Kodak tells us how to develop it.

More detail in the link than we ever saw with Medical X-Ray film.

https://www.ndtmart.com/info/MX125Tech.pdf


Not sure if yours is the same, but I have a pkg of Kodak Industrex xray film (MX125) I've yet to use. It is for industrial use and individual sheets comes in a paper sleeve.

[James R. Kyle]

Not sure if yours is the same, but I have a pkg of Kodak Industrex xray film (MX125) I've yet to use. It is for industrial use and individual sheets comes in a paper sleeve.

I have not tried that -- The "Stuff" that I have is Kodak "Industrex 620 Paper - Cat (number) 100 9554" - 8X10 Sheets in box.

With your film - You might try removing the protective paper from the film containment in TOTAL DARKNESS and put it into a film holder.??. I would not suggest you OPEN that stuff in safelight conditions as it is most likely Very Light Sensative.

Good Luck.

=0=

[ALVANDI Camera]

Iran, Mazandaran, Panoral 57 camera, Schneider Symmar-S 150/5.6, Forte No.2 5x7in paper negative

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4848/45980020202_9fb5a174f3_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2d46C61)

[charleymeyer]

Thanks for the PDF file on Kodak Industrex products Randy, it's very helpful!! Charley

[peter brooks]

These could equally well go in a 'happy accidents' thread. I've been trying for that old look but what the...

I quite like the effect (these are inverts of scans) but does anyone have any ideas on what has happened here? Blotchy... Streaky... Old paper developer (but has been fine when used lately), freshly mixed stop and fix... Paper preflashed for my normal amount of time. Paper is normal Ilford MG IV and has also been used lately. Standard tray rocking...

Any suggestions gratefully received :)

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7831/32727669678_9dda174bc3_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/RS2RYS)
Festive Bridge (https://flic.kr/p/RS2RYS) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4826/45687474725_8436c66a75_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2cBffvt)
The Valley (https://flic.kr/p/2cBffvt) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4807/31660775357_bb26c573be_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/QeKKtc)
Fallen (https://flic.kr/p/QeKKtc) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)