jeffbuck@swcp.com
Date: 08/23/02-10:32:31 AM Z
Carl: I do selenium with FP4+ (i.e., the cut-offs from Photo Warehouse)
because it works and is simple. 1:3 for 5 minutes. The routine is: Any shot
I set up for, I do an exposure and a back-up. I develop them one at a time in
trays. I give the first one +1 or +2 in WD2D-Pyro. If, in the wash, the
negative seems dense enough in the highlights or maybe/probably dense enough
in the highlights, I just finish and do the back-up the same. If I think it's
clearly too thin in the highlights, I do the selenium bath right out of the
wash. If the former has occurred (i.e., I don't do the selenium bath), but
exam after drying suggests I should have, then I re-wet and do the selenium.
Dick Arentz and others say that you get a bit less intensification this way
(but recommend it because it's less of a gamble), and that may be so. But you
get marked intensification, nevertheless.... I haven't been doing much
shooting that produces a negative suitable for pt/pd in the absence of some or
all of this heavy-handed "cooking" (diffused natural light portraits, outdoor
stuff through a zone plate).... BTW, Ed Buffaloe recently corrected me
(correctly) by noting on the general LF list that stain has no effect on
selenium intensification. I believe selenium is the simplest/best approach to
intensification. It is real stable, too, including in diluted form.... Do the
people on the list agree with me that the stuff in Adams about pre-bath in HCA
and all that is unnecessary? I just presoak the negative in distiled water
and wash it in plain water after the intensification and I'm aware of no
problems.... Carl, Would you please remind me, on or off list, what
densitometer you use and how you use it for reading pyro negatives?? -jb
Carl Weese <cweese@earthlink.net> said:
> Many alternate processes require negatives with more contrast than "normal".
> Some films can easily reach the needed level of contrast simply by extending
> development, others do not respond as well. Intensification to increase
> contrast is another way to get long scale negatives. I'm interested to know
> if anyone on the list uses this approach routinely, or as a normal
> corrective procedure. If so, what methods have proved most useful? Selenium
> looks like the simplest procedure, but there are others and I'm curious
> about results.---Carl
> --
> web site with picture galleries
> and workshop information at:
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~cweese/
>
--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:02:50 AM Z CST