Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    north of the 49th
    Posts
    1,147

    Re: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

    Christopher James' book, third edition, is also available at Bostick & Sullivan, which is where i got mine.
    notch codes ? I only use one film...

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    736

    Re: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by koraks View Post
    It is not at all 'necessary' to find a pure chloride papers (of which two are currently manufactured and I have serious doubts about the future of one of them). Any kind of photographic paper works fine for contact printing.
    Most current multigrade papers have high or very high chloride content emulsions, as do chromogenic papers.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,746

    Re: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Noel View Post
    Bromide paper does not give the density range of chloride paper. This was proved to me many years ago,and bromide papers have changed, bu not improved in this manner.
    The maximum density of a silver chloride emulsion tends to lag behind that of a bromide emulsion unless toning is applied. I think you refer not to the density range of the print, but the density range of the negative required by the paper. This is indeed quite long (ca 2 or 2.2 iirc) for chloride papers. However, in itself, this is not an advantage unless you're stuck with negatives with such a scale. There simply is no inherent benefit to a long-scale density range negative requirement. In fact, in practice, it can be quite cumbersome.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Posts
    3,444

    Re: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Noel View Post
    Bromide paper does not give the density range of chloride paper. This was proved to me many years ago,and bromide papers have changed, bu not improved in this manner.
    There appears to be difficulty in photographers communicating about this subject. "Density range" is frequently cited as a chloride contact printing paper advantage. But what does the phrase mean?

    Chloride contact printing papers typically have a lower gamma (contrast) than chloro-bromide enlarging papers. As a result, they can accept -- even require -- negatives with higher density ranges. However, resulting chloride paper contact prints do not exhibit a greater maximum reflection density than do prints on chloro-bromide enlarging papers. They're not "longer scale;" only the negatives one must make to match them are.

    I suspect that much of this confusion results from the fact that chloride printing out paper (POP) most definitely made prints that looked different than what one can obtain using either contact or enlarging developing out papers. POP's self-masking effect enabled extreme negative density ranges to be printed without loss of detail. Since POP is no longer commercially available, the only difference between enlarging and currently-sold contact printing papers is how one must target negative contrast for each of them.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    78

    Re: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sal Santamaura View Post
    There appears to be difficulty in photographers communicating about this subject. "Density range" is frequently cited as a chloride contact printing paper advantage. But what does the phrase mean?

    Chloride contact printing papers typically have a lower gamma (contrast) than chloro-bromide enlarging papers. As a result, they can accept -- even require -- negatives with higher density ranges. However, resulting chloride paper contact prints do not exhibit a greater maximum reflection density than do prints on chloro-bromide enlarging papers. They're not "longer scale;" only the negatives one must make to match them are.

    I suspect that much of this confusion results from the fact that chloride printing out paper (POP) most definitely made prints that looked different than what one can obtain using either contact or enlarging developing out papers. POP's self-masking effect enabled extreme negative density ranges to be printed without loss of detail. Since POP is no longer commercially available, the only difference between enlarging and currently-sold contact printing papers is how one must target negative contrast for each of them.
    Thanks for this explanation. It answers some questions I have considered for some time.
    Alex


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  6. #26
    William Whitaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the Southern Part of Heaven
    Posts
    1,301

    Re: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

    Received today my copy of The Book of Alternative Photographic Processes, by Christopher James, 2nd Ed. It is truly a magnum opus. It reminds me of my college chemistry text, which isn't too far off the mark. But I was thinking more in terms of bulk and volume.

  7. #27
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    7,851

    Re: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by William Whitaker View Post
    Received today my copy of The Book of Alternative Photographic Processes, by Christopher James, 2nd Ed. It is truly a magnum opus. It reminds me of my college chemistry text, which isn't too far off the mark. But I was thinking more in terms of bulk and volume.
    I have a couple images in that edition -- both are 8x10 contact prints (one platinum, one carbon) using B&S contact printing frames.

    Both processes nicely record what is on the negatives, with the carbon process being able reproduce negatives of a higher density range than the platinum/palladium process. It is nice to be able to tailor one's negatives to specific printing processes.
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  8. #28

    Re: Contact printing “how-to” but as a final product, not a proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by William Whitaker View Post
    Received today my copy of The Book of Alternative Photographic Processes, by Christopher James, 2nd Ed. It is truly a magnum opus. It reminds me of my college chemistry text, which isn't too far off the mark. But I was thinking more in terms of bulk and volume.
    I just got mine too! Heavy as a phonebook though... Now just waiting on the Van Dyke kit to start. Very well written too.
    Dean Lastoria

Similar Threads

  1. Contact printing: Practicing with RC paper, making final print with Fiber
    By formanproject in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 19-Oct-2017, 10:37
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 16-Dec-2013, 18:01
  3. How to prepare final support? Carbon printing
    By Nasser in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 14-Aug-2012, 14:51

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •