From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 02/27/02-01:37:01 PM Z
On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, Breukel, C (HKG) wrote:
> Is it posible to get a longer exposure range than 2- 21/2 stops out of
> duplicating film?
>
> That is all I seem to be able to squeeze out of AGFA's duplicating film,
> and it simply to little.
Cor, for a long time Freestyle sold Kodak's discontinued 2575 duplicating
film in which the problem, if any, was to REDUCE contrast. Other
duplicating films I've used were also contrasty. But I found them very
sensitive to aging... A box the same age as, say Kodak professional copy,
was dead much younger. That could be the problem.
Judy
>
> For details: see below the more detailed off-list mail.
>
> Curious about other (more positive) expriences with duplicating film.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Cor
>
>
>
> ....................... I was given a box of out-dated (no fog though)
> AGFA-Geveart duplicating film Litex RD610P. This could be an ideal film
> to make enlarged negativs in one step.
>
> So I tested it by enlarging a Stouffer 21 stepwedge with my CompanonS
> 150 mm (at f11) onto this film. I used diluted Ilford PQ print developer
> at first at 1:20, and secondly at 1:40 (normal dilution 1:10) for
> various processing times. As maybe expected the lower dilution and/or
> shorter processing times provide lower densities on the enlarged step
> wedge. What unfortunaly did not change was the "lith character"of this
> film.: no real toe, than a steep linear part over a shallow 4-6 steps at
> max (2-2 1/2 stops). No a good option for translating the information of
> a small negative a larger one (higher densities are desirable for alt.
> work, but also a linear response).
>
> Onether possible solution could Dave Soemarko's LC1 developer, designed
> for
> linear response of lith film.
>
> I also tried this developer (without the sodiumbisulphate) in the
> darkroom, but
> the results with this developer were compairable with the PQ results.
> Besides I do not know if one
> can compair both films. I seem to recall that duplicating film is
> carefully flashed lithfilm, so the next exposure is essentially a
> solarization.
>
> Do you know of any options to get a more linear response to light out of
> this duplicating film?
>
> ..........
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:22 AM Z CST