I consider computers, printers and their ilk to be very poisonous to our planet. Yet I do own and use it all. OE Sin. Not the OA.
Did you guys read the OP question?
I consider computers, printers and their ilk to be very poisonous to our planet. Yet I do own and use it all. OE Sin. Not the OA.
Did you guys read the OP question?
Yes, I read it. I would personally try both the internegative route and the reversal route. They both have their pros and cons.
Yes, I agree... the interpositive (in fact it's an interpositive, as it's a positive intermediate) has the advantage that it uses common chem and skills.
The reversal saves a film sheet and it's processing, but requires new chem, the dichromate bleach has special handling because safety, instead the permanganate bleach is safe but more prone to problems... and the reversal processing requires a good calibration to save time.
I first thought in the reversal process, nothing wrong with it, but IMHO it is more practical the interpositive, in the way Drew explained well. If we are to make several test prints to nail a result then the complex reversal process will take much more accumulated, so making the interpositive it's worth.
Also to consider that the reversal process is more difficult to adjust and perhaps we may need some Farmer's reducer bath or local application to clean whites...
If you are using glass carriers printing base side down can give you more Newton's rings problems. I've had the problem printing flipped negatives. The last time I tried negative images I was using Kodak Commercial 6127 film. Used under a safelight and slow.
I use AN glass top and bottom. It does not affect sharpness, and the texture rarely shows unless you're using a very hard paper grade.
Bookmarks