Re: darkroom enlarged negatives

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 02/02/03-01:41:32 PM Z


On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
> The surprise I found was that the Maco infrared film worked
> wonderfully! Since, with most alt processes, you need a contrasty final
> neg, the maco interpositive was the most punchy of all, and very fine
> grained. Next most punchy (this is my unscientific term for a nice DR
> range) is TriX. Grainier, tho. Bergger and Plus X both produce a dull neg,

But the drill is to make *soft* positive so you can get through all parts
of it easily for the negative. (See FotoDave, P-F #2.) If the positive is
"punchy" it's much harder to get a full scale negative, especially
separation in shadows & highlights -- or so goes the conventional wisdom.

However, your sharing these tidbits is most extremely pleasurable (so much
better you than I for the 88 hours in the darkroom). I trust you will tell
which was easier for the negative, the "dull" Bergger & Plus X or the
"punchy" tri X. (Perhaps another shibboleth will bite the dust.)
Meanwhile, how do you gauge the final negs -- got densitometer???

J.

> but still OK. I just printed my first 8x10 Bergger final neg (this
> exposed at F8.5, 1/2 sec, 19" high, Bergger 200 Pan film, developed
> Dektol 1:1 for 2 min altho I might try straight Dektol next) and it
> looks great.
> Oh, one caveat: Maco is a very soft emulsion, so I would only tray
> develop one neg at once and use a hardening fix and no temps higher than 70.
> Chris
>
>
>


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 03/04/03-09:19:08 AM Z CST