[alt-photo] Re: Paper Negatives

[Diana Bloomfield]

Hi Paul,

Thanks for showing those images; that's a really interesting  
comparison.  I like both.  The relative softness (on the Rives) seems  
to work well for those particular images.   I use Rives for gum  
printing, and it's actually my favorite paper.  More than the clarity  
difference, though, the difference in color intensity in your images  
was notable between the 2 papers.  So I'm curious-- was that a  
deliberate choice, or just what you're getting on the Rives, with the  
paper negatives, compared to the Fabriano?   I'm wondering if they had  
the same color intensity, if the softness difference might not be so  
notable?

I understand the appeal (I think) of making those negatives the  
"traditional"  way, but I absolutely abhorred that entire process.   
Again, though, I just never enjoyed working in a darkroom.  It's  
astonishing I stayed with photography, I guess.  I used to ruin a lot  
of negatives, too, with alt processes-- which doesn't happen so much  
anymore-- but if it does, I do like the idea that I can easily make  
another one.  Maybe I just have a lazy streak in me.

Diana


On Feb 10, 2010, at 12:35 AM, Paul Viapiano wrote:

> Diana,
>
> I learned to make traditionally enlarged negs on APHS film and had  
> great results, although as you mention, it can be very tedious. I  
> loved the results though and still believe it to be the best for  
> sharpness and clarity on hot press watercolor paper. I'm looking  
> forward to going back to working with them in larger sizes to master  
> the process (or maybe I'm just a darkroom masochist). I feel I can  
> learn a lot by working this way, but I won't abandon digital negs.
>
> The recent Irving Penn Small Trades show at the Getty Museum showed  
> his amazing platinum prints, of course using traditionally enlarged  
> negs. They were breathtaking in their clarity and tone. Penn, as  
> many of you know, not only used enlarged negatives but sometimes  
> several different ones for different areas of tonality in the same  
> print. What a show!
>
> Paul
>