RE: Lith film

Jeffrey,

We're tuned on the same wavelength. I also pay attention that all the tonalities of my original negative are transferred into the final print. Therefore digital negs are also an issue in terms of dots and resolution. I kept the hope that somewhere, a given lith film would allow me to play at low cost, that I just picked the wrong ones to test. I just received the curves of continuous tones processed lith film (APH) and they are what I expected. They would certainly fit a cyanotype paper curve or other contrasted printing techniques but certainly not Pt or Pd. The density range is only 1.1
It's also possible to boost it by sulfiding, but this wouldn't go beyond a density range of about 2. I need a density range of 3.0
To enlarge my negs, I screened the market and found two films. I use now an orthochromatic direct duplicating film with real halftones. I adjust the contrast for any process, and it's one step.
I posted it in the past. The size are limited to 10x10" an dthe cost is higher than lith film.

I keep the lith film idea for cyanotype tough.

Thank you all for your posts on this,

Philippe

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey D. Mathias [mailto:jeffrey.d.mathias@att.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 15:22
To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Lith film

Monnoyer Philippe wrote:
> I see a lot of people are talking about lith film.
> I'm not much aware of the previous discussions on this topic since
> the beginning of the list but I'm curious:
> I have a limited experience with lith film, but the few I tested NEVER
> gave me a long range of tones suiting palladiotype or platinotype.
> I even used very very soft developping agents and dilutions.
> The Dmax can be high, but a long halftone range was impossible.
> I should check the manufacturing specifications of such films,
> but in the meantime, let me propose 3 hypothesis ...

Philippe,
Your experience with lith film being limited in tones is like my own.
For the Pt/Pd process lith film alone will not provide the subtle tones
capable of being printed with that process. Although, some
photographers still use it, especially to get a larger negative, it
seems they are not interested in achieving those subtle tonalities (this
shows in their prints, not that it is good or bad, but that it shows).
Lith films are useful as masks to add some densities to areas of the
image (either in the highlights - negatives or in the shadows -
positives. But a good base film with excellent tonal latitude is still
important to have.

It seems that some like to find shortcuts, and most of the time this is
evidenced in their prints. The good graphic arts films have almost all
been discontinued, but there is some hope if one is willing to work in
the dark. Instead of the ortho films that are now gone, try using a
regular panchromatic film (many still availiable in large sizes). By
going through the positive/negative production route and adding masks
where needed, one can still make a superior enlarged negative.

Another alternative for large negatives is the Kodak Duraclear material
which comes in wide rolls and has very good dmax and tonal quality (but
not as good as some B&W films). One still has to work in the dark, but
processing in best by machine.

I still have found digital to be not there yet due to posterization
issues, but it should not be long before at least 16-bit depth can be
printed on a transparent substrate. At least then a competitive
comparison can be made between a digital and a quality analog negative.

-- 
Jeffrey D. Mathias
http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/