FotoDave@aol.com
Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:13:15 -0500 (EST)
>>> would it be better to
> >enlarge the 6x7 negative onto a sheet of 4x5 (for example) film and then
> >enlarge the 4x5 positive onto a sheet of 8x10 (for example) film?
>
Hamish.Sophie@wanadoo.fr writes:
> I used to use this method which provided good results.
Yes, I am currently using this method and like it a lot! Recently I am testing
contact 35mm, but that was just for a test only. I still like the double
enlargement.
For those interested in this approach, remember that the size/enlargement of
the 1st generation is important since there is a softening effect in each
step. If you make the first enlargement (positive) the same size, for example,
then when you later enlarge it to the final size, the softening effect can
show. However, if you enlarge your 35mm to 3 x 4.5, since there is some
enlargement, the softening might happen just on the grain level, so it won't
blur the result; and I, like Hamish, think that the result is excellent.
> I enlarged the
> original 6x6 neg onto 4x5 commercial film - 4127. This film is continous
> tone and rather flat. I made rather flat, and slightly dark positives to
> get all the detail in the neg and then enlarged the 4x5 onto 8x10 lith
> film.
For those using lith film, I want to give an update to the use of LC-1 (if you
are using it) although this has also been mentioned in the journal. I now
always use LC-1 dilution 2:2:6 for the interpositive for low low low contrast
because I found that you can always increase that in the 2nd generation
without losing any details. Development is 4-5 mins in my rotary processor.
For the interpositive, I only use different dilution *if* the original happens
to be very low in contrast.
> Though
> making the positive the same size as the finished neg does make it easier
> to make adjustments in contrast and so forth on the positive..
I don't quite understand why contrast is easier to adjust in one size than the
other. Do you mean things like burning and dodging?
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:41