Hi Eugene
A friend of mine used to use single weight FB papers in camera (5x7). He
found that he got smoother tone and better detail by printing wet. His
results were quite amazing, as I recall.
Good luck and Happy Holidays,
Bob Lyman ( railroad@northweb.com )
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Workshop/7610/
http://www.artists-in-residence.com/users/radiance/
----- Original Message -----
From: <erobkin@uwc.edu>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 1999 1:08 PM
Subject: Paper negatives
> I am starting a series of experiments using large sheets of printing paper
> to make in-camera negatives. My first crude attempt succeeded very well
but
> before I get deeply into this I'd like to know what papers other people
may
> have tried and how they worked.
>
> Yes I know, check the archives, but as I remember most of that
concentrated
> on separating the top layer of RC paper from the rest without much detail
on
> just what paper was involved. I'd like to avoid the separation step. My
> experiment used intact paper and worked just fine assuming ASA of 1 with
12
> seconds exposure at f8 in the camera. Great detail, very encouraging.
Gave
> a good print and the pale Kodak logo on the back did not print through.
At
> the moment I am guessing that RC paper is the way to go.
>
> On another note, I am trying to locate some process lenses with FL's in
the
> 800 mm range and above for another experiment. So far the two I located
had
> price tags way out of my reach. I've restricted myself to a sub poverty
> budget for this one. Does anyone have any information to share on sources
> to check out for these. For what it's worth I've several lenses in the
200
> mm FL range and lower. Maybe someone will entertain a trade. Off line
> communications on the lenses would probably be best.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Eugene Robkin
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 12:10:49