"Roba Apposta," a reversal process for paper and film

[Marco Annaratone]

Hi everybody,

I just completed the profiling of a couple of widely available papers (Ilford MG RC and FB) used in-camera and then inverted using “Roba Apposta” by Branco Ottico, an Italian company. “Roba Apposta” is a reversal development process sold as a kit that works on both film and paper. I used it only on paper.

I am quite happy with it.

I made two videos of this profiling, using a Heiland TRD-2 densitometer:

Part One: https://youtu.be/bH0y5qAJeDw

Part Two: https://youtu.be/mWIv2Y7O0CM

Both are in Italian, a lovely language for sure , but not many understand it

On a more useful note I wrote a paper in English which is pretty much the translation of both videos with same pictures, numbers, etc. Here is the link:

https://www.marcoannaratone.photogra...-(PDFs)/thumbs

Scans and measurements can be downloaded, the links are in the description of the videos and in the aforementioned paper.

I included below an example from a project I just started (“Syringes”). It’s an Ilford MG FB 14x17in cut from 16x20 and used inside my Lotus ULF camera. G-Claron 355mm @ f/45.5

I have no relationship to Branco Ottico so I suggest you have a look at their site if interested:

http://www.brancoottico.fineartlabo.com

Cheers!

[richydicky]

Hi Marco

Just a note to say thank you for the thorough work you have done and for sharing your results. I meant to do that after reading your findings on Imago DP. I haven't used that but have done quite lot with Ilford DPP so am happy to see see that you done the same with this so look forward to reading your findings. One thing I thought that may be useful is a conclusion page. However, the main variable in the whole process appears to be the light - season, time of day - and without any way of measuring UV is always going to be trial and experience to get the exposure right in the first place.

Thanks again for your work.
Richard

[Marco Annaratone]

Thanks for your kind words, Richard!

I have already prepared a video for my Youtube channel (i.e., in Italian) where I compare the four methods (Imago PP, Harman/Ilford DPP, Ilford MG RC reversed, Ilford MG FB reversed). I will do my best to translate the video in English and put together a fourth and final paper.

All these experiments have been done because I will soon start (in fact, I already started) three (multi?)-year long projects all based on one-off photos. I have always been passionate about the concept of "in-camera photography" from the days when I was shooting 12x16in Cibachrome in camera. While I am not dumping the negative-positive process or God forbid bad-mouthing it (I myself use it all the time), I am just attracted by this "daguerrotypish" way of picture taking: one shot, one print, one artwork, period. And I also recognize its two quite serious shortcomings, i.e., the mediocre sensibility of the material and the fact that images appear sideways. (Actually, there is a third one, i.e., the art market has demonstrated a complete lack of interest, if not downright suspicion, about projects with editions of 'one', but I can live happily anyway.)

My very-very personal conclusion is that I like the Imago PP and that if/when I use a fiber-based paper I may use a silver-based negative paper (e.g., the Ilford MG FB) and go through the reversal process with Roba Apposta rather than using the Harman/Ilford DPP. I liked the latter a lot in terms of texture and the superb blacks it delivers out of the box, but I found its emulsion quite delicate (read: fine little scratches) and I had to use a hardener. (But while I am sold on the Imago PP, on the choice of a fiber-based paper I may still go back to the Harman ...)

I subscribe to your comment re: the variability of the results on the basis of the spectral content of the illuminants. My projects will be 100% in studio, so this is not a concern for me.

Cheers