Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Mon, 02 Aug 1999 15:33:00 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Melvin Dorin wrote:
>
>
> To this discussion on peeled RC, I would like to add that I (last week)
> made an enlarged neg from a "bulletproof" pyro developed neg that got away
> from me. This "bulletproof" neg would not print for Pd/Pt, but printed for
> Ag (after a Grade 0 session) on Ilford Multi III RC. Using the Ag positive,
> I exposed a sheet of Agfa N31p as a contact neg. The results were quite
> good, and the resulting Pd print was quite pleasing. Very small loss of
> sharpness--almost unnoticed. This saved the negative, as far as I was
> concerned, and I didn't peel anything. Exposing through the RC print took
> 15 seconds using an enlarger source as the light with full aperture on the
> lens.
Wow, that really must have been a dense negative! I often contact thru
*doubleweight* fiber paper -- and those exposures are only f8 for 15 or 20
seconds, although that's on lith, which may be faster than the N31P.
Of course the RC print is better as "paper" positive if you happen to
have one -- it lies flat better & has no paper texture.
Judy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Judy Seigel, Editor >
| World Journal of Post-Factory Photography > "HOW-TO and WHY"
| info@post-factory.org >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:40:40