The Paper Negative

[mysteryscribe]

So why am i developing mine for four to five minutes at a dilution about the same thought I mix mine with film developer as well. Interesting. Anyway I am waiting for the outside shots be sure to get some in bright sunshine as well as shaddy spots.

 

[JamesD]

I'll have to recalibrate my printing process as well in order to make sure that I'm getting the right shade of gray on the output end, which I'll also do soon. After that, there might be a slight adjustment in the final ISO number, but I doubt it. Of course, with such a narrow exposure latitude, the final ISO number will be highly variable, anyway, depending on the subject and the highlights and shadows around it, and how you want to represent each in the final image.

Also, I developed for 90 seconds in Dektol 1+4 because that's the standard I use for prints. I'm establishing a baseline; later, I'll look at other times and dilutions and see whether they extend the range at all.

 

[mysteryscribe]

For those of you who tinker with paper negatives I tried again today to shoot one inside for another still life.

Actually I spent the morning building an 8 x 10 daylight tank. I used a couple of empty chemical bottles to do it and it seems as thought it is going to work. I stuck a flower in it and was going to do a still life.

Now there are a couple of things that seem to work for me but I also keep forgetting them so let me try to outline them.

In almost any daylight you can double the iso at least, without making any changes to how you develop it. If you try twenty in the bright sunshine and I have with mixed success, you can add 50% or so to the development time. Just a place to start..

NOw in the studio what I relearned yet again today. If your meter reads less than a minute trust it. If it reads over a minute, double the exposure. That seems to take care of the retroprosity effect... at least for me.

 

[mysteryscribe]

Since people grow and evolve you will be interested to know that I have decided to finally build a dedicated paper negative camera. I am paring down the numbers of cameras I have laying about. Well the ones that I built anyway.

Tomorrow I am going to use one of my cameras that is leaking light through a back I DID NOT build, to build a 3.5 by 5 paper negative camera. I am going to permenantly mount it to a tripod

why 3.5 by 5? it's the size of a half sheet of 5x7 paper. I will no longer be cutting four of five different sized pieces of paper for negatives. I still have film for my 4x5 and 2x3 cameras that is precut. I have one good 120 camera that I built and a couple of junkers laying about.

Now I plan to do something with a couple of3x4 cameras I have about as well. Anyway I think this might be the last build I need to do. EXcept lol I do think I might build another 4x5 field camera. The studio 4x5 is a pain to work with at the park or the lake. Im not sure how I feel about 2x3 yet.

anyway the search for the perfect paper negative solution continues.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I feel such an idiot. I really am making the kinds of mistakes that first week photography students make.

Okay it took a little build and rebuild of the paper neg camera but I got it done. So I decide that I'm just gonna take all the paper out of the dark box in my lab and go to the bathroom kill the lights and cut it all.

I found two boxes of paper in my dark box. Yes both 5x7 but two different types. Duh all those days of not being about to figure out if the the iso outside was 10 or 25 guess what the paper develops differently. I shot some of the thick paper outside at iso 25 and it did perfect. That wasn't even pushing it at all. I might just push it 50 percent to see if the negative isnt just a little better.

So here is the difference. One is arista edu ultra. iso 2 to 10 the other is arista rc plus grade 3 is the fast one 5 to 25 it is also thicker. Don't know what difference that makes but I can tell which I have by the feel now that I know.

iso 25 makes it high usable outside. Inside on a tripod so no big deal. So now i have a good veristle field paper negative camera. And way way to many other ones.

The plus is about double the cost but still that give me 200 sheets from a box of a hundred pieces.. Cost twenty bucks for the good stuff or ten cents a shot. Slower paper is about 13 bucks for 200 shots. or about 7cents a shot.... I think when this finally runs out in my next lifetime, Im going with the plus again.

Just thought I would let the two or three other guys know there is a big difference in the paper. I would love to find some contact paper. I think it is even faster.

Hey phil is contact paper faster than regular printing paper.

 

[mysteryscribe]

For those of you foolish enought to be trying paper negatives let me say there is a huge amount of exposure difference between the papers just like film.

The arista plus in the sunlight is 1so 25 which is a respectable speed. I shot it again this morning and got the times for my developer worked out. I think if it were an emergency you could push it to iso 50 by trippling your development times.

arista ultra is about iso 10 in the sunlight just to give you an idea of the difference. you can probably cut iso in half for both under indoor light. It might go back up for strobe.

This shot was made at 1/25 of a second f8 developed 4.5 minutes in my own developer. the spot is some kind of flair or light leak i need to work on but the exposure is fine.

 

[mysteryscribe]

First of all I'm not going to stop shooting paper negatives. They appeal to me on many levels, but there are a couple of things I don't like. Actually only one.

I don't mind the loss of tiny details. I shoot for the shapes and relationship of things not the grain of the wood.

I don't mind the lack of latitude in the exposure. After all I'm not shooting on demand. Unlike nuclear war I do have 'do over' opportunities.

I hate the length of the exposures. I don't mind the ones under a minute but some of them can run hours and that gets to be a drag. There is very little latitude in the paper negative which is fine. It just means i meter more carefully. Using the paper neg with a lensed camera cuts the exposure time down and that helps. Generally speaking I like paper negatives.

For greater detail or for shoots requiring that I shoot people on the fly it is film all the way. For almost anything else paper will do nicely and fits into my general feel these days. Hey i'm a retro kinda guy.

 

[terri]

For fun, and with the right subject, I can see where paper negatives could be a lot of fun. You've certainly experimented with them more than most people would have.

I can be extremely patient for art's sake (traditional hand coloring, bromoil printmaking are not quick processes) but I doubt I'd have the patience for paper negs. So I tip my hat to your efforts, Charlie! You've gotten some very nice stuff.

 

[mysteryscribe]

hell terri
I cant stop now i just gone a hundred sheets of 5x7 paper in.

 

[Jeff Canes]

So what about shooting more outdoors in good light?

I loaded my holders with paper a week or so ago but I have no Dektol can in use D76 or another film developer?

 

[mysteryscribe]

shoot them at iso two at first. use the d76 with the regular not the double delusion and try it for the same time as film. After you see the first one you may have to adjust the time.

I expect it will be the same time as iso 100 film but you may have to adjust and please let me know about the d76..

I make a developer I use for paper and film. I mix half d76 stock soluter with half dektol stock to make my own stock solution. then i use the stock 1 to 4 for about half the d76 time and the same time as the 25% more than the dekol time for paper. I dont get noticeable grain and it cuts the developing time in half for d76 And I dont have to juggle developers.

 

[Jeff Canes]

That would be like Plus-x in d76 at 68deg for 7min I fine with that developing time.

But I would prefer to shot at a higher ISO like 10; ISO 2 will require a longer exposures

 

[mysteryscribe]

I could never quite put a handle on pushing paper past the max time.... I develop mine in a daylight tank for about four minutes which usually doesn't seem to get any better with more time. Try it and see. Shoot the first one at iso 2 at seven minutes developemnt time. The two will work at some development time. Play with the time till you get a negative youi like the try pushing it up to 10 that would be about two stops. Use the 40 percent rule for the development. that would be about a hundred percent addition time in the soup. See it that helps. It just might I never tried it with d76 staright.

 

[JamesD]

I expose at ISO 6, and I've developed in TMax developer before (1:4 dilution) with good results. Some experimentation will be required to get the absolute best results, but it took me less than an hour (including exposure time using a pinhole camera) to get good images with just a bit of experimentation.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I think i have come to the conclusion that paper like film has different speeds so I should have said to test yours jeff. Mine is arista ultra and I can't get more than iso no matter what I do.... However at one time I had a different type paper and could push it to iso 25 but that was only once. I could never dupicate it. Ten with that paper was doable in the bright sunshine only.

Im at a loss but if I shoot it at iso2 I almost always get somekind of negative. If you pan develop you have a much better change of working with the speed I think.