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

Hi Galina,

Paper negatives are not so great for on-the-road pinhole, but it should be no more hassle
than lith film. The extra density would not be welcome for contact printing, but if you do
digital negatives off them anyway then all is fine.

The trick to get rid of the paper texture is simple. No peeling off anything required. Just
give a small amount of white light exposure through the back of the paper first, before
you use it in the camera. The right amount of exposure will add just the density needed to
make the texture disappear when viewed on a light table. A little testing will be needed to
determine the right amount of such "flash" exposure.

Properly treated, such paper can be used immediately or months later, just like film.

Need a companion to tour the west coast of Norway? Wish I could!

Best,
Sam Wang

>
> From: Galina <galina@online.no>
> Date: 2003/12/09 Tue AM 05:59:11 EST
> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> Subject: 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
Received on Tue Dec 9 09:09:52 2003