Steve Shapiro (sgshiya@redshift.com)
Wed, 20 Jan 1999 10:59:01 -0800
Subject: Proofing for Alt. Process
>List Mind:
>
>I have a question for everyone regarding the proofing of original film
>by photographers working in alternate processes. Most alt processes are
>either expensive, time-consuming, or both and most photographers don't
>expect every exposure to be a "keeper". So how do you
>inspect/examine--proof--your negatives to decide which ones are worth
>printing in platinum, or gum, or carbon, or whatever?
>
>Proofs in silver present several problems: many alt processes demand
>negatives unsuited to the scale of conventional silver papers, and a
>proof in silver may look so different from the intended final result
>that it isn't really helpful.
>
>I've been making digital proofs of my 8x10 work. They don't look like
>final prints either, but they are sufficient for me to evaluate the
>potential of a negative. There's a snag with my 12x20 negatives though,
>since my little flatbed scanner would require three sections to take in
>the whole negative: it's faster (though much more expensive) to make a
>proof in silver.
>
>So, what do YOU do to proof your negatives intended for alternate
>process final prints?
>
>---Carl
>
I just want to add to your question, Carl.
If you reach a point that you can look at a proof print, can't you survive
at that same level of expertise and determine the value of a negative by
looking at the negative?
I read a negative with my Weston Densitometer once every so often, but after
I 'get the idea' I go on to simply dip and dunk, slosh and dry. Same with
my development by inspection. Once I 'watch' a neg, I go on in mass
production [for me that's 5 at a time] and develop by time and temperature.
Perhaps this is the new/old intuitive methode: Check your mind with
machines, print your mind with heart.
Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:43