Hamish Stewart (hamish.stewart@wanadoo.fr)
Fri, 30 Jul 1999 16:40:42 +0100
>Subject: Re: Freestyle dupe film or SO132
>Sent: 28/7/19 10:33
>Received: 28/7/99 12:53
>From: Jeffrey Bunting, jrb@maui.net
>Reply-To: Alt-photo-process, alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>To: Alt-photo-process, alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>CC: Mac Legrandi, juicebox@my-deja.com
>
>Aloha Mac and All,
> If you are on a budget you probably don't want to hear this. I have used a
>pack of Kodak SO132(direct duplicating) that runs about $4 per 8x10,(no
>larger sizes available) with some good results. It is SLOW, exposures
>running about 10-15 minutes from my 2.25" negs, development time is also
>long, 10-15 minutes in paper developer. I have had better luck with the
>SO132 than the Lawless Litho reversal process, unfortunately considering the
>sizes available and the $$$ difference. I can't seem to get a good range
>with the litho, the mid tones come out flat. Whereas just about every neg I
>have printed on the SO132 is printing well.
>Any other experiences out there with the SO132?
>Good luck, Jeff
>
Yes,
I used to use another version of a similar Kodak product 4168 also I
think SO336 (I stand to be corrected). Liked this film very much, but the
exposures where long - though once you have worked out the right time for
your negs, I found you can often use a standard time. Develop in Dektol
at either 1:1 or straight up to 5 mins. This for gum - other processes
you would want to run longer time or use stronger dev - perhaps D-19
would give the additional density for other processes that need it.
The film eventually became unavailable in australia so I stopped using
it. Also for my gum prints lith negs work well and being restricted to no
larger than 8x10 is also a little frustrating. This other thing to
remember is that this film also makes your exposures longer due to the
high density of the film base...
Cheers
Hamish
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:40:39