From: Katharine Thayer (kthayer@pacifier.com)
Date: 02/06/03-03:14:22 AM Z
Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
>
> Martin,
> Some have said that UV inhibitors exist in paper, and thus paper negs
> are unsuitable for alt UV processes.
>
This is news to me, Chris, and I don't recall reading that anywhere.
Could you give me a source? I've used all kinds of paper negatives,
oiled, waxed, and not, for gum prints. How the exposure time varies
relative to film varies according to what film and what paper, but in my
experience paper doesn't in general give a substantially increased
exposure time over film, and what increase there is would be
attributable to the thickness of the paper and the fibers in it, I would
think. If that is all they're talking about, why don't they just say
that, instead of invoking a term like "UV inhibitor."
The one thing that doesn't work is unpeeled RC paper; that DOES have a
UV inhibitor in the form of a big slab of plastic. I even used
double-weight fiber paper once for a negative (took a ton of oil for the
16x20 paper and still wasn't really soaked through) but the exposure was
only 5 minutes as opposed to my usual exposures around 3 minutes.
Katharine Thayer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 03/04/03-09:19:08 AM Z CST