Re: Paper negatives
- To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
- Subject: Re: Paper negatives
- From: Guido Ceuppens <altguido@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 12:12:23 +0200
- Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
- Delivered-to: alt-photo-process-l-archive@www.usask.ca
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com;s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;bh=xsb1v0qZH9IdFMFtsJ6aSU6qOHMWRYqwQKHxSEljv30=;b=Xvm9xKny1kgU/m5lqT7ZbYQK2IATMzUffjPPVI7+RE4WaKWuQtHKG4Ph0zFHOFhKqPxqn+nYAhnXsoNgk822Dj9XBkZnOO/rHAPdD3jaoACu6O4a7J6B3aAVmyN7BVTCH6G4C7S8XP5ZtiO7qyxeEVVRq4ZOqcGfaujbtUUR8lw=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references;b=WaF66oAIW1EROkFAJI+GqWuTJLSYS5BJnz+PqTmxPXytBbH9ohqVV/9YtamzNW8D7sr/roLan8iS+MUCtodk+N8x1co2eVHbG8Z3l1SpIni6Tx6UpSgOpeQeVTlF9m3zMoEwYgywwlKUB3IttNFvkGWdY2+8ktpi64Qv7+xLYIc=
- In-reply-to: <48F1663F.7070906@this.is>
- List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
- References: <48F1663F.7070906@this.is>
- Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Laura,
I like the image but I think the second one (un-oiled paper) needed
far more exposure.
I tried a quick exposure comparison between oiled and un-oiled Epson
PQP, using a 31 step tablet and cyanotype. For my setup I found a
difference of 2.5 stops:
oiled PQP : exposure 8 mins,
un-oiled PQP : exposure time 48 mins
I did not make a complete image as I cannot see any advantage in using
un-oiled paper, the extra (not too messy) step does not, FOR ME,
warrant the extra exposure time needed for each negative, especially
in multy-layer gum.
Greetings,
Guido
2008/10/12 Laura Valentino <laura@this.is>:
> I never got a clear answer about whether it is possible to use the Epson
> photo quality inkjet paper as a negative un-oiled, so I did a little test :)
>