[alt-photo] Re: direct positive paper

[Richard Knoppow]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "etienne garbaux" <photographeur at nerdshack.com>
To: "The alternative photographic processes mailing list" 
<alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2010 11:06 AM
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: direct positive paper


> Christina wrote:
>
>>Ilford/Harman is now making a direct positive paper!
>>
>>Anyone use this yet and can report results?
>
> I did some preliminary tests and found it too contrasty 
> for direct in-camera exposure unless the scene is very, 
> very low contrast.  Even under heavily overcast skies, I 
> had to blow out parts of the sky to get decent shadow 
> separation.  You can pre-flash, but if the scene has 
> anything resembling highlights they fog and blow out very 
> unattractively.  I tried several low-contrast developers 
> to no avail and gave up.
>
> Do take their warning about latent image fading 
> seriously -- you need to expose within minutes of a 
> flashing exposure and process within 10-15 minutes of 
> exposure.
>
> I don't know if US distribution has been organized yet --  
> mine was shipped in by a friend.
>
> It is WAY too contrasty for making enlarged negatives in 
> one step.
>
> Best regards,
>
> etienne
>
   I wonder what its intended purpose is, the high contrast 
sounds like a document copying paper although I don't know 
why anyone would need one these days.
   I have not looked at the specs, is it a reversal paper or 
a direct positive based on a pre-fogging and controlled 
solarization? The later is developed in a single step while 
reversal development requires two developments and a bleach 
step.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk at ix.netcom.com