FotoDave@aol.com
Date: 02/05/00-10:49:13 AM Z
> I've even
> attempted Dave Soemarko's low contrast developer, perhaps I didn't
> follow mixing instructions, but was greatly disappointed with the
> result I got from that one attempt. I could see that indeed there was a
> possibility of good detail and low contrast...but what I got was sort
> of a very thin sepia yellow brown colored negative...and the image
> seemed to dissolve in the fix...(sorry, Dave, I will mix another batch
> and try it again!)
Hi Garimo,
That's ok. My attempt was to show that lith film can be made to work
(perfectly), but if others found other combination (film, developer, etc.)
that work for them, that's equally great! :-)
The problem is sometimes it is difficult to describe exactly the look of
negatives and procedures in words. Perhaps in the future I will include an
interpositive and negative made with APH / LC-1 and the resulting print in
the traveling portfolio so that some can see it. A negative is worth a
thousand words, I guess.
In your test, do you remember what dilution you use? Try 2:3:5 for the
interpositive, and if you like neutral tone for the final negative, use
strong LC-1 (for example, stock A only with little or no dilution), or you
can use D-76 or diluted Dektol for the final negative. I now use LC-1 both
for the interpos and negative not for the reason of narcissism but because of
convenience.
> So I went back to a dilute paper developer, first
> 1:30 then 1:20 and then settled on 1:25.
Again, it is great if it works for you. Sometimes people get into mottling
problem if paper developer is diluted so much. Actually there is nothing
magical claimed about LC-1. One can look at LC-1 as a simple way of slowing
down development but instead of using dilution, it uses lower alkaline, so if
dilution works, then there is no real reason why LC-1 with the right
combination of stock A and B won't work. But again, if dilution works already
for some people or combination, then that's great. :-)
But again, as I posted in another email, the key is the *right*
interpositive, otherwise one might get compression in highlights and/or
shadows especially if the original negatives are contrasty.
This reminds me of something. After I wrote the article, someone emailed me
and asked if I did enlarged negative commercially and wanted me to make some
enlarged negatives for him to be used in a workshop. Being excited by LC-1
myself, I replied that I would make him the negatives free of charge even
including the film, but he sent me some APH film anyway. But at that time I
was myself a new user of LC-1 and so I was still experimenting. I thought
that I didn't need stock B and could do it with dilution of stock A only,
thus I committed the same mistake that I wrote about in my article!!! The
negatives were ugly but his workshop time was approaching, so I had to send
them out. I apologize to the person. He must have a very negative feeling
about using LC-1 for enlarged negatives!
To the person (first name Ed), if you are reading this and are interested,
you can send me the negatives again, and I will make enlarged negatives for
you again (free of course) just to show you what a difference stock B can
make.
Dave Soemarko
***************************************************************************
***** See Soemarko's Direct Carbon (SDC) prints at
***** http://hometown.aol.com/fotodave/SDC/
***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 04/24/00-04:37:09 PM Z CST