From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 03/25/01-10:22:59 PM Z
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Tom Ferguson wrote:
> .... All of the enlarged neg systems have limitations. The neg to
> pos to neg is slow, uses lots of materials, and is farther removed from the
> original film. The chemical direct positive system require non "off the
> shelf" supplies and is very exposure sensitive.
Tom, don't forget Liam's reversal method -- I think that may have the
least "limitation" -- and is streamlined in final "one flash fits all"
version. It does require potassium dichromate and sulfuric acid, tho
neither of those is obscure. Especially if you're doing a lot, so you
get in the swing of it, maybe the least "removed" from the original?
As for neg to pos to neg -- a lot of materials? One extra sheet of lith
film? I think for someone just wanting a toe in the water to try, it's
pretty simple -- AND gives two cracks at adjusting contrast, once in pos,
again in neg. (We don't always get a second chance in life, ya know.)
I for one wouldn't dink around with reversing original film, as in those
kits for 35 mm. Expensive, sold only in large packs, limited shelf life,
etc.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:27 AM Z CST