Re: CGP was Re: Big neg (was: Cyanotypes on glass)

Thank you, Gordon for the information!

I have been in contact with Kodak, Agfa, Konica and all the graphic
material wholesalers all over Scandinavia in order to get a source for
lith film, but they all refuse to import that film for me as I only
wish to buy small quantities at a time. No one else uses it here
anymore. They have to order it from other places, so they would not
order just one roll for me.

That is the reason why I am giving it up and heading towards digital
printing just as all the rest of the world. Sad story, I loved working
with lith film in a pinhole.

Thank you, Sam and Tom for the advises. I appreciate it.

My logic tells me that I should not use paper neg this time. But teach
me the trick about removing paper texture, just in case, Sam! I hope it
is not about pealing off the paper base? I think it is not worth it.
Lith film is not so much more expensive than paper and the time one is
using on preparation of paper neg together with the extended exposure
times during contact processing make it not worth the trouble. I can
scan transparencies on a flat scanner as well, if I decide to do it.
Dram scanning gives better results though.

I am planning to contact copy in the sun later, so the ideal would be
to use paper final size in a pinhole and contact copy directly. If I
could work nearby home, I would have chosen that. But I am going to the
west coast of Norway, driving around and staying at hotels. Not so easy
to reload a big pinhole, not so easy to develop the tests.

I am still trying to find the most effective way to go.

Regards,

Galina.

www.galina.no

On Sunday, Dec 7, 2003, at 19:20 Europe/Oslo, Gordon J. Holtslander
wrote:

>
> Hi:
>
> The reason I use Kodak's CGP film is that it is sold here locally. I
> found it was prohibitively expensive to order Lith film from outside of
> Canada, due to an assortment of minimum international orders, shipping
> costs, and brokerage fees. In the age of the internet and online
> shopping, I tried the radical method of phoning a local pre-press shop
> and
> asking what they had for lith film. They had CGP.
>
> Its sold by Kodaks graphics arts division Kodak Polychrome Graphics -
> which appears to have offices all over the world. If others are having
> trouble getting a lith film considering trying this film.
>
> I'm not trying to PUSH this film over any other - but it works and it
> appears to be very widely available.
>
> The phone number of their office in Norway is 47 66 81 60 00
>
> Worldwide phone numbers here:
> http://www.kpgraphics.com/contact/phones.html
>
> Sizes available here:
> http://www.kpgraphics.com/pdf/info/FilmAndPaperProducts.pdf
>
> On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Galina wrote:
>
>> I have used Maco´s film, it is fine to my opinion. Rather expensive
>> though here. There is no lith-film available here anymore, one has to
>> get it from Europe or USA, taxes and postage make it three times the
>> original price. It is so frustrating, that sometimes I am about to ask
>> people on the list for help. If one sends it as a private package -
>> there are no taxes! Smaller formats I usually drag with me from London
>> or Berlin, but the sizes that Gordon has been mentioning remain to be
>> a
>> dream.
>>
>> Here in Norway it is not so much less cold or darkness wintertime,
>> still if it is sun and snow (rather high contrast picture) my
>> exposures
>> in a round 60 cm pinhole and 120 high were about 1,5 min on that film.
>> In the shadow or towards 3-4 PM it may be as long as 15 min., but you
>> loose contrast so much then, that I had to heat the developer to
>> about
>> 25-28`C in order to get any picture at all.
>>
>> Naturally, the hole is much bigger in a pinhole than in a field
>> camera, but i have also used very big format (50 x 60 cm) Maco lith
>> film neg in a field camera inside with the artificial light. Portraits
>> turned very Cameron-like: diffused and mystic! Exposure started at
>> about 20 min in my setting. But one can certainly make still-life or
>> object photographs that way.
>>
>> I am planning to take some pinholes outside during Christmas, but
>> decided to make them rather small, scan and enlarge digitally on my
>> Epson 7600. There will be a lot of experimenting with file sizes and
>> print definitions, I hate that! Wonder if my Mac is going to like it?
>>
>> Could anyone tell me what would be the reasonable way to go if I want
>> to print negatives about 60 x 200 cm from a Photoshop file? How big
>> should the file be for printing on Epson 7600? Are there any clever
>> tricks? I plan to scan on a dram scanner at a service company, but
>> will
>> I be able to handle such big files on my poor Mac G4 ? Has anyone been
>> printing on Epson 7600 in those sizes? Jack Fulton gave me some
>> valuable advise earlier, maybe he can help again?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Galina.
>> www.galina.no
>>
>> On Sunday, Dec 7, 2003, at 14:29 Europe/Oslo, Timo Sund wrote:
>>
>>> Viestissä Sunnuntai 7. Joulukuuta 2003 08:45, kirjoitit:
>>>> Very, very long cigarette breaks up there in December, I imagine.
>>>
>>> yup... have done long time ago some 35mm exposures at -25C it took
>>> about
>>> 15minutes/picture and You might imagine how it felt when I was again
>>> inside...
>>>
>>> If I recall right I shot about 5-10 pics that night. Beautiful slides
>>> btw.
>>>
>>> If ASA-range is from 1-12 that's masochist enough ;-) Now must place
>>> order
>>> for suitable lith-film Anyone used MACO's lith films?
>>> (they have my caliber 18x24cm sheetfilm available)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Timo Sund
>>> Kiihtelysvaara, Finland
>>> ---
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Gordon J. Holtslander Dept. of Biology
> holtsg@duke.usask.ca 112 Science Place
> http://duke.usask.ca/~holtsg University of Saskatchewan
> Tel (306) 966-4433 Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
> Fax (306) 966-4461 Canada S7N 5E2
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Received on Tue Dec 9 05:02:27 2003