martin_pistor

Hi Eric,

rather sounds as if your assignment targets where not clear.

There is no regulation authority for defining alternative process as isn't for fine-print or alike words.

Unfortunately www.alternativephotography.com lists polaroid as an alternative process if used with lifts, scratching or else additional treatment, if a website could be regarded as such an authority.

Therefore if it's a target for your grade, a poll won't help.

We all'll see the day when silver gelantine will be alternative process, for "non-alternative" will be digital.

If Lith would have been alternative is just the same discussion.

I'd just argue, that the task was not defined properly, and you saw no obvious objection.

Whereas you already handed in, the easy way out to scan and print negs for lith or ancient processes is obviously missed.

If your class uses a documentation, script or book, that clearly gives a definition whats "alternative" and polaroid itself is not listed, you've lost. But then, you could have known before.

Regards,

Martin

I'd doubt you'll be happy with scans from a 8x11. You might try, but what kind of scanner you're planning to use? Minox is really edge of physical possibilities. So I'd rather prefer analog printing.

Anyway, let us know your experience.

Film development should not be any reason to make a big deal.

There is a modification for the Jobo 15oo series reel (available ready at 8x11film.com (maybe JandC will be able to provide them in the US)but can be done with some care at home, or you have a look for an old Minox daylight tank.

When you tried it once, you'll find even going to your friend to hand over the film is more exhausting (ok, if you need a reason to visit him).

Regards,

Martin

Hi Henning,

your're right. Ive you develop to what Ansel called infinite gamma, you get infinite contrast. Actually, everything is either dmin or dmax. In reality, even the dark shadows will be on the dmax side, so the tonal scale of your object is completely dmax. Thats flat, isn't it?

Martin

You might also have a look at

http://www.alternativephotography.com/

for contemporary examples.

Van Dyke for landscapes... I did, I'm afraid, not well known enough.

Actually I found Kallitype gave better control of contrast.

Have Fun

Martin

anybody counted how often we've been through this???

Martin

Why not trying Neofin blue (ok, its expensive) but its been developed exactly for this kind of film.

massive dev. times are ok for a start, and I like it very much. If not for slow speed developers, don't overexpose. I had shadow detail similar (maybe 2/3 stop apart due to different measurement) to the adox CHM 400 (HP5) measured with ISO 100!! (some mistakes are lucky)

Martin

After all similar woes I came back to arches platin. Still a very slight brown/yellow fog but totally even response, no blotches.

Martin

http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7545778523

For the not-german speaking: This had been advertised as a back-up camera from the (pro) studio of a womens mag. Definitively not the Vogue;-).

No words...

Martin

Hi Conrad,

what you found is:

there's no law not to use 4x5 lenses on 6x9.

Actually from appr. 120mm a normal (wideangel) lens like a Nikkor W, Symmar, Sironar or else will cover 4x5. A tele or classic normal (appr. 50Degrees, like Ronar) will start only with more then 200.

Martin

Martin

Hi Al,

we'll make a reservation at the Darwin Award for you.

It can't be posted for enough times:

NO CHEMICALS in FOOD CONTAINERS.

Hi Bruce,

actually I prefer plastic, for it doesn't shatter into a brilliant mixtures of soup and glass when it falls down. If' might start to leak.

If your storage shelf is not exposed to the pure sunlight, no need for amber.

Martin

Hi Dennis,

I think, it depends if you want to do identical copies or Internegs with increased contrast. For the latter I'd suggest (I also tried successfully) Paperdevelopers. Preferably neutral/cold tone ones.

Martin

Hi Troy,

you wrote>>but I need something that will not totally clog the pores of the surface like a sealer<<

Did we mention, Liquid light will cover the surface like gelatine, for thats exactly what it is?

Anyway, if you're located in US, contact JandC aka fotoimpex.com for purchase.

Have fun,

Martin

Every alt process ex. liquid light and Bromoil will require an original size neg. No enlarging.

According to my experience, Van Dyke is rather tolerant to surfaces, that might contaminate the emulsion. For Cyano, you should make a test. Coat, do not expose, but wait for half an hour, wash. Let dry and wait at least on week, sample exposed to sunlight. If it turns blue, forget it.

Gum bichromat nearly doesn't care about reactions with the carrier, but will show up sealing the surface like glue.

Maybe indirekt Bromoil might be a way, for you can try to print from a bromoil to another carrier.

Martin

Yes there are. Pls. excuse, I'll let you do the search through prior threads yourself. I can promise thers's a lot.

Martin

1. ref. to colleagues above.

2. Its a concern with specific papers. Forte PWT is equivalent to Moersch select sepia, so for samples ref. to www.moersch-photochemie.de.

Depends also on your developer if you can do completely without additional sodium sulfite. Some devs already incorporate a minimum amount. This matter is about try and error.

Martin

Hi folks,

after evaluating POP via a greyscale I found xtrahard negs are

required.

Any recommendations how to produce negatives with a appr. Dmin-Dmax

of 2 or even a little more from subjects with normal contrast (wich

is normally regarded to be 30-100 or log. 1,5-2) meaning I'd need a

gamma of more then 1.

Internegative process is known, but I'd like to use my 8x10 negs

directly.

Thanks,

Martin

I think I answerd this question before:

ISO 400, Cross push 2 Stops.

http://portfolio.grossformatfotografie.de/details.php?image_id=26&mode=lightbox

actually now I realize, why this picture permanently is top "most looked at" in this forum gallery ;-)

Still wondering, how anyone got ever good results with those 3-50ASA settings though.

Kind regards,

Martin

Hi folks,

what would be your recommendation if I need the densi also for UV and normal light?

Kind Regards,

Martin

Hi Charles,

taking stronger developer and less bromide, less exposure also is a way to have less tone, but to get clear white I'd suggest a gold toner, wich does a total decolouring at first, then retoning again (take out before).

For the photo I'd guess they whitened the bathing suit in reproduction/printing.

Hi Lowell,

actually after looking I found most lithable paper claim to have "extra much" silver content (Adox Vario Classic "2,5 as much as others") Whereas I do not have proper values for most papers, except salesmen buzz when claiming, "Mine has most" I can't confirm neither disagree.

Actually I believe besides the "incorporated developers" which is a common known k.o. criteria there's more to lithing then silver.

The Adox mentioned above is a pita in lithing, Polywarm is terrible good(no secret why Wolfgang Moersch sells it under his lable too)also claims "high silver content" even I don_t like the pinkish tone sometimes, Fomatone I don't know about the silver, but is as pretty as easy to lith. My favourite.

If any I'd say coldtone papers are hard to lith, so the presence of lots of silvercloride seems to help both a nice, not to rough "lith grain" and rich colour.

Unfortunately Wolfgang only translated his autotoning (lith-two-bath) and toning essay into english, not his Lith course, but even "reading by pictures" would give a lot of information about different papers to you.

Martin

Hi Lowell,

the amount of silver is not critical to Lithprinting according to my experience. What actually bashes your developer are "normal" developing substances even in small ammounts. Therefore all papers with incorporated developing substances are not lithable. IMHO You actually miss something if you didn't try Fomatone and Classic Polywarmtone (aka Moersch Select, some Berger or Forte). For a good overview have a look at the tutorials at www.moersch-photochemie.de. All the eastern europe stuff should be available in US from fotoimpex.com aka jandc.

Have fun

Martin

Hi folks,

you are absolutely sure, Jay needs a .4-.7 neg for Cyanos and Van Dykes? Maybe I`m not firm with converting Gamma to Densitiy, but for my Cyanos and my VanDykes I do need a Gamma close to 1 or a density (reflectivity is irrelevant) range of at least 1.4-1.8. Pop even on the hard end. A .5-.6 normal condenser head enlarging neg doesn't show the contrast range necessary for alt processes.

If you really know mods on the sensitizers/processes, that work with a say .5 neg, i'd really appreciate to know.

Maybe different for the one-step reversal process. I didn't try this.

Jay, maybe it would be helpful to know, which goal you hope to archieve with using FB paper negs instead of film or RC Paper.

Regards,

Martin

Hi Jay,

althought it shows up in literature, i'd not recommend to do paper negs. You do not only need a high Dmax, but also a long Dmin-Dmax. Obviously the Paper will add a high "fog" or Dmin.

This would mean until your shadows are exposed sufficiently, your lights are too dark.

I doubt there are any lightweight FBs around. Most are at least "double" 180g/sqm or triple 280-300 g/sqm.

I admit I didn't try waxing, maybe thats a way. But after starting with maco GPF i had no reason anymore.

fotoimpex sells a special lightweight "document" paper by foma, but thats RC and fixed contrast.

So if you insist on FB, my first guess would be Fomabrom or Adox/Classic Polycold for they are on 180 and bromide-silver gives you strong black.

Martin

Sorry pac,

not judgeable by the scan.

It's to rough to say it's no lith, I even saw a guy selling prints on RA-4 (colour) paper which looked like heavy toned BW or fine grain lith-prints at first sight.

Personally I'd try a lith on Polywarmtone with a low dilution and maybe a selenium toning.

Martin

Hi CP,

did you use the other chemistry (Bleach and Fix) from the P3/P30 set, or did you also mix them from the scratch?

Thanks,

Martin