In respoonse to your questions re: carbro.
> Is the Carbro process inferior in results to using a negative for exposure?
With appropriate negatives the final result in carbon and carbro is
identical. However, the tonal scale of a carbro is similar to the bromide
that is used to make the pigment print, whereas with carbon one can print
negatives with virutally any density range.
> Can it be done with modern paper with gelatin overcoating?
Yes, some of the modern papers work very well with carbro. I get excellent
results from Kodak Polycontrast RC Type 111, N surface. To make a good
carbro print you will need to print the bromide much deeper and of lower
contrast than would be considered acceptable for a final silver print (by
as much as 1/2 to 1 full stop of exposure and at least one paper grade
lower in contrast). There have also been appearing on the market recently
quite a number of non-supercoated bromide papers for bromoil use. These
should work well with Carbro also.
> Is it a reasonable alternative to enlarged negatives?
With the proper negative it is a reasonable alternative to carbon with
enlarged negatives. However, it is a much more delicate process to work
than carbon, and the mating of bromide/sensitized tissue is very critical
and difficult to do by hand. My own work in carbro improved greatly with
the use of a roller squeeging device of the type described in the old
literature.
Sandy King
>----
>Richard Knoppow
>Los Angeles,Ca.
>dickburk@ix.netcom.com