Matt Baker (Matthew.H.Baker@drexel.edu)
Mon, 02 Aug 1999 16:57:03 -0400 (EDT)
>Date: Mon, 02 Aug 1999 09:41:15 -0800
>From: Melvin Dorin <mdorin@beckman.com>
>Subject: Re: Rethinking: RC peel appeal
>To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>MIME-version: 1.0
>X-Lotus-FromDomain: BII
>Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
>
>
>
>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.
>Mel Dorin
>
>
>
>
>Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com> on 08/02/99 08:03:38 AM
>
>Please respond to alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>
>To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>cc: alt-photo-process-error@sask.usask.ca (bcc: Melvin Dorin/BII)
>Subject: Rethinking: RC peel appeal
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Jack Fulton wrote:
>
>> Dea Ginger
>> Peeling is simple.
>> RC print. Tray of fairly hot (115?+ ? what you feel is okay for your
>hands) and
>> let the image sit for , oh, say, 3 minutes.
>> Either take the photo out of the water and by slowly rubbing a corner
>with your
>> forefinger toward you. i.e.: pull your finger slowly from the point of a
>corner
>> toward you ?? the corner will lift slightly from the paper underneath.
>Sometimes
>> this works beter while remaining submersed in the hot water.
>> By continuing in this manner, under the water, you will peel the total
>'skin'
>> from the paper.
>> After, you can continue to rub, under the hot water, all the pieces of
>paper
>> still sticking to the RC vinvl photograph.
>> You ought not to worry much as the material is rather strong.
>
>
>I have never peeled a negative and I never hope to peel one... but I tried
>once (see the archives), at which time there was, as I recall, some
>mumbled agreement with my protests.
>
>Firstly, although granted my technique was not as advanced as Jack's, and
>it sounds like Jack's is pretty well devised, the fact is the effort is by
>no means certain, reasonably tricky to do, and time consuming. Then, it
>seems to me, assuming success, you have lost one of the great advantages
>of the RC paper -- stability. So my first question would be, how much
>"quicker" in exposure is just the film part as neg than the entire RC
>sheet, which my students used for gum with about 15 minute exposures.
>
>The other advantages of RC paper are variable contrast capability and
>being relatively cheap in large sizes... but Freestyle lith film is
>cheaper and probably larger, although it isn't VC. However, near-variable
>contrast flexibility in reversal of lith film is laid out by Liam Lawless
>in his two articles on reversing lith in Post-Factory Photography issues
>#2 & 3. Number 2 also has an article by Dave Soemarko ("FotoDave") on
>taking Freestyle lith as positive and negative to the desired contrast.
>(That's not even counting the articles about making your own gold chloride
>and the maestro Mortensen's acreage of bosomage, etc. etc.)
>
>Equally important, to begin at the beginning, Issue #1 tells how to match
>the enlarged negative to your process, with a $5 21-step sensitivity guide
>(with educational discount it costs about $2.70... every student should
>have one), & the 2 white cards with the holes punched in them. The H & D
>curve is explained generally ("make it your slave") in an article titled
>"Sense and Sensitometry." That department, "Negative Thinking," is one of
>P-F's reasons for being.
>
>I mean even waiting for P-F by snail mail, it's got to be quicker even in
>the short run than that peeling business. P-F #1 also lists 16 other
>routes to the large neg and is slowly (but surely I hope) working its way
>through them. "The Paper Negative" as manifested & permutated in our time
>is scheduled for #4.
>
>Ginger, I'll send you a couple of adorable E-flyers for this publication
>offlist. Also, needless to say, to any others who volunteer.
>
>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