From: Nelson Goforth (ngoforth@earthnet.net)
Date: 02/01/01-10:59:35 AM Z
Shannon,
I tried the BTZS tubes for three sets of negatives (mostly doing the tests
to determine proper dev time), and liked them save for one problem - I got,
on at least one neg per batch of 6 - flaking of the emulsion. One small
flake (not a scratch, but an irregular flake) that had come loose and then
laid back down on the emulsion. No one else at school used them, so I
couldn't get any good advice. I don't know if it was a fault in the
negative itself, or if in twisting the neg to remove it from the tube I
somehow caused it to flake, or if I did in the fix, before the neg got
firmed up or what.
I have been wanting to revisit the method, but haven't had the time.
Development time: I actually went through the test in Phil Davis's book (or
a modified form of it). Yes it's tedious, but the results were impressive.
I was able to get negatives of contrasty subjects and negatives of less
contrasty subjects and they all printed in about the same light in the
enlarger. I used HP-5, but was getting a 'normal' time of 11 min in D-76
1:1.
Nelson
>I wonder if people on this list use the BTZS tubes to process negatives for
>alt-process. I am getting ready to process some 4x5 Tri-X negatives, and I
>am thinking about trying those tubes. If you do use them, how many minutes
>is your normal development of Tri-X in, say, D-76? I am planning to make
>some cyanotypes and palladium prints.
>
>--shannon
_________________________________________________
Nelson GOFORTH Lighting for Moving Pictures
+1.303.322.5042 pager +1.303.634.9733
resume at: http://www.earthnet.net/~ngoforth/film
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/06/01-04:55:37 PM Z CST