Re. Paper Negatives
Hi Everyone, I can only speak from my own experience with paper negatives, but I have found that the ability to work them has been a real blessing. When I first started to learn the carbon transfer method I used transparency material in my printers to make digital negatives. I've tried a number of types of material that were locally available and eventually even bought several large rolls of Mylar to use. This turned out to be a rather expensive proposition. When making only a single negative for a monochrome carbon, the consumption of the material was reasonable, but when I began to print the multiple negatives required for color work I found my material costs were going up exponentially. The bottom line was that by switching to paper negs, I saved an incredible amount of money (to me anyway) while working my way through the more difficult parts of the learning curves. When I go back to transparency material in the future, I will obviously need to retest, but I will have the experience to deal with it without wasting a vast amount of material. As far as sharpness issues go, I have never had the privilege of being able to print with large format film negatives so I have no experience there. But in comparing the sharpness of my prints made with paper as opposed to Mylar in relation to the amount of money I was saving in materials costs, it turned out to be a no-brainer. By the time I factored in the aspects of the paper texture of the final support and light diffusion through the gelatin, I could see only a negligible difference (if any) in sharpness, not enough to worry about. I've had greater sharpness issues in just enlarging my source material up to the final image size. I print using high power Olec light sources so that could quite likely influence the final result as well. I have never used a much more diffuse fluorescent light bank and I imagine that may cause sharpness issues with paper negs. Paper also has it's own esthetic, which I do not find unattractive, and each paper is different so experimentation is key. Besides, if you don't like the effect you get as a negative, you can always use it for the regular run of the mill printing you need to do every day. I plan to post my experiences with paper negatives to my web site as I am able to do so, and will be covering the details of my methods of working with them as well as comparisons between the papers I have tested, so maybe check it from time to time. I won't post the actual links because they may change as I work on the site, but the info will be available through the "Articles" menu of the site. Andrea http://www.andreazalme.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Grocott" <john.grocott403@ntlworld.com> To: "The List" <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca> Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 5:02 PM Subject: Re. Paper Negatives > Jaceck ( and All ), > I think it safe to say that what you thought about less detail > with paper negs is generally true. Those working with paper negs dont mind this. It depends on the style of the work in progress. > > We are in the field of alternative photography processes ( sometimes ) which, of course, often swings away from the purist silver > gelatine approach to picture making and loss of detail is quite desireable > in the finished print. Even with silver gelatine work loss of detail was > often sought after by the use of various means, as with some pictorialist and the ''Linked Ring'' and '' Sessionists''. ( Alvin Langdon Coburn and many > others. ) > > Having said that it is surprising how much detail can be > retained from the original negative using paper negs. Silver gelatine paper > negs can achieve greater detail, using the right paper, than digital paper > negs. Its a useful topic with many opinions based on the experience of those who have actually made and used paper negs. > > Looking forard to the discussion, maybe. > > Best > John- Photographist - London - UK > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jacek" <gonsaj@iinet.net.au> > To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca> > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 12:29 PM > Subject: Paper negative > > > > > > Other than the transparency route of producing negatives for alt > > processes, what are the pros and cons of the Paper negative route? I > > always thought a paper negative wouldnt give all the detail a transparency > > negative would give? > > Cheers > > Jacek >
|