Carl Weese (cjweese@wtco.net)
Sat, 23 Jan 1999 10:03:08 -0500
Liam,
John Rudiak's suggestion that you may be gaining additional contrast
because of the bleaching procedure is worth checking into. You are
right, I love working with big cameras, hate making enlarged negatives,
and so I am printing from in-camera originals.
However, I find that pyro negatives with plenty of contrast for
excellent Pt/Pd prints with no print contrasting agent (a good idea) do
not require terribly long exposures. They typically print in about 15 to
twenty minutes in my UV light source which is just about twice as
long--one stop denser if you will--than negatives developed in HC110 to
a sufficient level for Pt/Pd. This actually creates a very efficient
workflow since the exposure time is enough to comfortably prepare
another sheet of paper for printing. As soon as one print is done the
next goes in the box for exposure.
Rollo should be listed in the B&S website catalog. You can also find
there instructions for Stuart Melvin's pyro-based enlarged negative
process which may interest you. My feeling is that most of the reason to
use pyro with modern films is the stain factor.
I can't think of any reason why properly made enlarged negatives
shouldn't print approximately the same--in terms of formula and printing
time---as in-camera negatives.
---Carl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:47