Re: Paper nergs without oiling.

Op 14 dec 2005 om 16:57 heeft Katharine Thayer het volgende geschreven:

> Henk,
> I'm not sure we're in disagreement here. I wasn't arguing against
> paper negatives, in fact probably 90% of all the gum prints I've made
> have been printed from paper negatives of different sorts. I was just
> saying that for me, RC paper takes inordinate amounts of time to
> expose, because of its plastic backing, and won't take oil very well.
> If you're saying that the color paper you're using is the same as RC
> paper, and works well for you, and takes oil well for you, then
> that's great; opposing observations are the rule of the day for us
> here, isn't that so?
>
> John was wondering why anyone would need to oil a paper negative,
> since he contact-printed RC paper onto RC paper in 30 seconds. My
> point was that for alt processes, RC paper takes a lot longer to
> contact print, and that's why we would want to oil paper negatives,
> although I haven't found that RC paper oils well. That's all,
>
>

Katherine,
What I mean by 'color paper' is just the ordinary prints you got from
the supermarket, so I think it's comparable with 'our' RC-paper. Anyway
it is some kind of plastic and no way for oiling , waxing etc.
I just mentioned it , because it was just by accident that I discovered
one day that a certain supermarket delivered my snapshots on paper with
no logo -KODAK, AGFA etc- on the backside, so it coul be used for
negatives. They told me it was FUJI-color-paper, but I don't know if
this is correct.
Of course it could be more 'transparent' compared to RC-paper, but I
also use it for positives to produce lith-negs, and there I have more
or less the same exposure times compared to Ilford RC multigrade.
It must be the continental air or something....:-)
Cheers,
Henk
Received on Wed Dec 14 10:34:51 2005