Joe / Maris,
I've used the Efke paper in the past and still have a few packs. About the Harmon paper:
1. Is there a notch? Efke paper does not have a notch.
2. Can you tell 1 side from another (tactil) while loading in a DD?
3. I shoot 4x5 and the Efke paper size was always a little too big and I have always had a lot of difficulty loading it into DD's. Does the Harmon actually for DD's?
Regards,
Ron
I have some of the RC paper. No notch, easily fits into all my holders, and the paper has a slight curve towards the emulsion side, so it is pretty easy to tell which side is which. There is also a different feel that is difficult to describe, but definitely discernible.Originally Posted by gevalia
I actually thought I had gotten it backwards when my paper came out all white, but it turned out my developer had died...
Richard
As Richard indicated, the FB paper I work with curls toward the emulsion side. When purchased through Freestyle's website, they specifically state that the 4x5 size will fit 4x5 sheet film holders, and I've had no problems.
With the Efke "4x5" paper, I've found that there were two sizes being sold, one was a true 4x5 size that was too large to comfortably fit inside film holders (which you must have had) and the other is sized to fit inside film holders. Freestyle used to market both sizes of Efke, and you had to read carefully to figure out which to get.
~Joe
The photograph and the thing being photographed are not the same thing.
Aside but - scratching my head trying to figure out what variant of "film holder" has initials "DD." Can't figure it out - what's a DD?
Maris and Joey
Glad to have you guys here as the leaders!
I'm about to order Harman and also Ilfochrome papers and a, wondering whether or not they will need trimming to go into standard Fidelity 4x5 and 8x10 film holders. I have purchased a Jobo CPA-2 with lift for this enterprise and wondering if there are any hints you might give.
What's your process for testing and calibrating.
In this, did you alter your assumed ISO as part of the test parameters or did you use say 3 and one fixed temp. then adjust everything else?
50 sheets is a lot of material to go through. Do they sell 4x5 and 8x10 of the same lot of paper. I'm worried that if I do the calibration on 4x5 paper, the 8x10 could need to be done from the beginning again! I guess one can cut up the 8x10 to 4 sheets for this!
It does seem then that one needs to buy at least 200 sheets of the same production run or else the percentage of wastage must be high!
Do you ever pre-expose, (flash) to decrease the contrast or any such tricks?
Asher
DD = double darkslide
Another name for film holders
Interesting, never heard that before (nor does it make a lot of sense to me since the darkslide is just a part that works with the holder itself but never mind.) Funny the things you learn here. Thanks.
DD stands for double dark.
You're supposed to know that it's an abbreviation of an abbreviation of the phrase "double dark-slide" and that the "S" has been omitted, presumably because the "S" key on the typewriter of the first person to use this abbreviation was stuck. And since there are two dark slides in a film holder you're also supposed to know that the first "D" means "double." It's one of those abbreviations that serves no purpose other than to hinder communication.
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
I've only worked with the Harman Direct Positive paper, ordered through Freestyle Photo's website. On their website they state whether the paper is sized for sheet film holders or not.
I started with an ISO of around 6, and kept the developer dilution constant (1+15 using Ilford's PQ liquid concentrate) and temperature around 68-72f. Subsequent rounds of testing brought me to rating the Harman Fiber Based glossy direct positive paper at an Exposure Index of 1.6.What's your process for testing and calibrating.
In this, did you alter your assumed ISO as part of the test parameters or did you use say 3 and one fixed temp. then adjust everything else?
I also found that developer exhaustion is something you need to watch with these direct positive papers. With paper negatives, as the developer begins to exhaust its strength, development times need to be extended, but the resulting negative density and contrast doesn't suffer as much; some folks report better control of contrast with paper negatives in partially exhausted developer, something I can corroborate. With the Harman paper, if the developer begins to exhaust then you will not get adequately dense shadow details, the shadows will instead appear to be a mottled and weak middle gray.
As for batch-to-batch consistency, I've been using the Harman 4x5 sized paper in two different batches and find little or no variance. Your exposure and processing tolerances are probably looser than the paper's manufacturing tolerances.
Pre-flashing is my standard method for all paper negative or direct positive paper media. It helps to bring out the shadow detail and control excess contrast. I found that for the Harman Direct Positive paper it required about 1/2 of the preflash time that I normally give to grade 2 paper negatives.Do you ever pre-expose, (flash) to decrease the contrast or any such tricks?
Asher
For using the Efke RC direct positive paper I found it required significantly longer preflash times than the Harman, and its range of exposure tolerance was very narrow, as compared to Harman's paper, such that I've essentially given up on using the Efke and now recommend Harman's direct positive fiber based glossy paper as a better product (for my use ... you mileage may vary).
I'd also say for the benefit of those who have not worked with direct positive paper, or paper negatives, that troubleshooting your initial calibration of the paper can be confusing. So for your benefit, here are some tips to keep in mind:
- Unexposed, undeveloped and fixed direct positive paper should look blank white.
- Unexposed and properly developed / fixed direct positive paper should look pure black. If you cannot get unexposed and developed paper to look absolutely zone 1 black, then your developer is either exhausted or impure. You need to be able to achieve this first before you proceed.
- Any additional exposure that you give the paper will add brightness to the image.
- Pre-flashing the paper will lighten the shadow density somewhat. You will want to arrive at an Exposure Index and pre-flash amount that, combined, produces an image with good but not excessive contrast and adequate shadow detail.
- The Harman paper is essentially sensitive to only blue and UV light. Think daylight only. So when you meter the scene, with your light meter set to your paper's ISO rating (that you've determined through testing), make sure that the meter is only seeing daylight illumination of the subject, not artificial lighting.
- The Harman paper, like other paper media, is not sensitive to reds and browns. If your subject matter predominates in those colors, you'll need to give the paper some additional exposure. How much exposure? You'll have to determine this through experimentation and testing, but a good rule of thumb is to give it one additional stop of exposure.
- Shiny metal surfaces and water will reflect much more UV light than you might otherwise think, showing up on the paper as much brighter exposure. You will need to compensate for this in your metering and/or exposure.
- Indirect daylight illumination (like from a north-facing window) provides very nice soft lighting for this paper. Under direct sunlight the images can present a harsh contrast, even with pre-flashing, so keep that in mind, especially for portraits.
~Joe
The photograph and the thing being photographed are not the same thing.
Here are examples of developer tests using the Harman direct positive paper.
The first set has two test strips. The top one, medium gray, was unexposed paper developed using used paper developer that otherwise produces nice paper negatives using grade 2 paper and an extended development. As you can see, even with an extended development time, the paper would not get any darker than medium gray.
The second strip was after the addition of some makeup liquid concentrate into the used developer batch. The result is a darker shade of gray, but still mottled and uneven development.
The third test strip is a pure black tone, achieved by using fresh paper developer. It seems pretty clear that the Harman paper requires fresh developer for each session. It will give you much more consistent results.
~Joe
The photograph and the thing being photographed are not the same thing.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks