Some comments and questions.
><< There is little question but that APHS with PMK is capable of givin
>As I mentioned in another post, it is very easy to achive a density range of
>1.8. I can easily achieve 2.1 or 2.7. Since you are using continous-tone
>negative as the first step, you should have no problem at all using APHS with
>Dektol (unless for some other reason you prefer PMK). If you find that it is
>still a little difficult to achive the density range that you need, the
>easiest way is to increase the density range of your interpositive.
In my tests I followed initially the information supplied by BS on the
litho/PMK combination, the purpose being to see if I could produce a final
enlarged negative from the APHS film with a curve suitable for carbon
printing. I use PMK for about 99% of my work so it made sense for me to use
this developer for the final enlarged negative. Ultimately it is not so
much the density range of the negative that interests me as the nature of
its characteristic curve. At this point I have plotted the PMK/APHS curves
but have not yet determined how they will print in carbon.
>You sentence ended abruptly (or never ended). Were you disconnect before you
>finished? :) With a continous-tone interpositive, I have no doubt *at
>all* that APHS can give the density range since the film itself is capable of
>giving density range much higher than we need. The problem I was trying to
>solve was if one wants to use APHS also as interpositive.
I was not aware that you were trying to make the interpositve with APHS. I
did not try to use APHS for the initial interpositive because the
combination of yellow-green stain on the PMK developed negative/ortho film
would have introduced another exposure and contrast variable into the
system.
BTW, in the information supplied by BS it is recommended that the initial
development of the interpositive in D23 1:3 be followed by 3 minutes in a
1% sodium metaborate solution. What would be the purpose of sodium
metaborate in this situation?
Sandy King