Re: to make enlarged negatives

Strange Ross (ross@axp.psl.ku.dk)
Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:49:38 +0200

>David said:
>
>>Crawford in "Keepers of Light" says that with some many fine negatives
>>around, it is a shame that lith films are still used for making large
>>negative, but he does not explain what is wrong with using lith. Could
>>someone comment on this, especially if you are using lith film?
>y real reason not to use lith?
>
>
>Compare a lith neg with a properly exposed and developed sheet of FP4 and you
>would not need to ask the question.
>
>Terry King

David,

I have for some time been using Agfa's CS film which, I think, must be
characterized as a lith film; in any case, it easily produces very
contrasty positives (or negatives) Agfa's G5c developer. It has surprised
me that the film apparently reproduces all intermediate tones quite
faithfully (with proper development, and possibly an initial water bath),
and that I can discern no 'lith effect'. Compared to Agfa's N31p the CS
film has a much straighter characteristic near threshold; this means that
where you would have to place your positive (or negative) somewhat up on
the N31p curve (to avoid the reduced contrast near threshold), the CS film
can be exposed right down to threshold. This, of course, again means that
you can use shorter exposures for your alt-photo process.

The only disadvantage of the CS film that I can think of is that
development is quite critical, and just a bit difficult to control.
Consequently I usually expose a couple of CS sheets and develop them
slightly differently, so that I can later select the best one.

One further advantage of the CS film is its price, costing only slightly
more than one-third of N31p.

Finally: I have been using the CS film only for the making of positives for
the polymer photogravure process, - but I can see absolutely no reason why
one should not obtain the same good results for negatives.

Strange Ross
Hvidehusvej 35
DK-3450 Alleroed
Denmark Phone: (+45) 48 17 42 92 http://axp.psl.ku.dk/~ross/