nate_ely

<p>Jose,<br> You'll need to do some extra steps, a full reversal process, with the galaxy paper to produce a positive image unlike the ilford which is positive with a normal b/w process. Galaxy sells reversal kits, but I could not find any information on the process at all. I don't like that they are calling their paper direct positive, when it isn't and that there is not a reliable source of information as to how to use it. <br> I did find this process for doing reversal with Ilford MGIV, I would imagine it will work with Galaxy as well since it requires reversal processing and is not direct positive like Ilford DPP. Hope it helps, if you try it out let us know!<br> I can't remember where I found this info, but it's not my process and I haven't tried it, FYI. <br> Reversal Process for Paper Negs:</p> <p>Using Ilford MGRC B&W paper in camera, achieve a negative and then reverse process. Preflashed on enlarger 20cm (height of enlarger head) f8 for 6 seconds to lower contrast. I have been exposing this at Ilford RC VC at ISO 3 for scans and ISO 1.5 for reversal.<br> I have found Fiber Based paper to difficult to rinse between steps (splotchy prints if not completely rinsed) and have stopped trying to use it.</p> <p dir="ltr">Necessary Chemistry</p> <p dir="ltr">In addition to normal darkroom chemistry (developer, stop bath, fixer)</p> <p dir="ltr">Bleach:</p> <p dir="ltr">Part A: 2g Potassium Permangnate to 1000ml water - Lowes</p> <p dir="ltr">Part B: 28g Sodium Bisulfate to 1000ml water - Lowes</p> <p dir="ltr">Mixed 1+1 before use. Silver metal starts to collect quickly in the tray and can be problematic after only a few prints. Use as little as is needed and replace often.</p> <p dir="ltr">Clearing bath:</p> <p dir="ltr">30g Sodium Metabisulfite to 1000ml water - Brewing store.</p> <p dir="ltr">Process:</p> <ol> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Develop: Fresh developer is a MUST. Even when prints look good to the eye, weaker than full strength developer results in splotchy midtones.</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Rinse: before turning on the lights, all developer must be rinsed off the print. I use running water for about 1 minute with the RC paper. For important prints, I would extend this time.</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Turn on the lights (or move outside the darkroom) (I have started doing steps 5 and 6 in the darkroom with safelights for more consistent prints)</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Bleach: until all metal silver is removed. About a minute seems to be the norm.</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Rinse: The bleach has an obvious color and running water for about one minute removes this.</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Clearing solution: The clearing bath seems to work in seconds taking the paper back to what appears to be pure white. I leave it for 30 seconds to be sure.</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Rinse: a last rinse to remove the clearing agent before redevelopment of the positive</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">The exposure of the positive happens during the bleaching and clearing under normal room lights or the bleach and clear can be done under safelights and then the redevelopment can be done in normal room lights.</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Develop to taste: the second development results in a positive image.</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Stop Bath</p> </li> <li dir="ltr"> <p dir="ltr">Fix</p> </li> </ol> Wash as normal

<p>Hahaha... Alright. Thanks for the response. I was asking if anyone had experience with this paper or the chemicals used to develop it. <br /><br />I know what I'm getting into, the difference between negative vs reversal processes and how to use a light meter.<br /><br />I'm interested in DPP because of the look/tone and the fact that I can go from camera to finished product in a few hours. Simplifying the process by eliminating some steps will hopefully save me some time. I don't think that's an unreasonable expectation if you first put some time into getting a handle on what you're doing. <br /><br />The whole reason to submit this sort of work would be to show my interest in film and analog photography, so no, I will not be shooting digital. <br /><br />This is for graduate school applications, all of which require a digital portfolio... That doesn't mean that I have any interest in showing work that doesn't represent what I do or or why I'm applying to grad school in the first place. I have a lot of 35mm and MF images but want to have some portraits that really stand out and add some depth to my application. <br /><br />I want to shoot some quantity because I want the luxury of being selective about what I submit.<br /><br />For what it's worth I've decided to go with Harman DPP and adjust lighting/time for the much slower ISO rather than deal with Galaxy's reversal chemicals, of which I can find very little information online... which is what this question was really about. <br> <br />There is a multitude of information about Ilford's DPP so I should be able to hit the ground running with it. </p>

<p>Mods, please remove this post. I think the large format section is probably not the best place to ask about a specific paper. Reposted in a different section. TY!</p>

<p>Hi All,<br /><br />So I'm going to be starting a portrait project in the next few weeks. Planning on using a 4x5 crown graphic. I'm leaning towards using this <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1208400-REG/slavich_glx500351_galaxy_hyper_speed_direct.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Galaxy Hyperspeed</a> direct positive paper. Leaning towards DPP for ease of use. From the examples I've been able to find, the tone is really nice and it looks pretty low maintenance.<br />For now this will just be part of a digital portfolio for grad school applications and I only have a few months to get things sorted before applications are due.<br /><br />I'm hoping that not having to print or scan actual film will save me time. Also hoping using this RC paper will make it more forgiving than film when it comes to developing. I do have a darkroom space, but it's not set up very well and I really want to keep this as simple as possible which is the whole reason to go with DPP over sheet film. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.adorama.com/glx500365.html" rel="nofollow">Here</a> are the chemicals to develop it.<br /><br />Anyone have experience with this stuff? Tips for using it etc? <br /><br />Anyone have other development processes other than their system that they use with it?<br /><br />I was thinking I would probably do tray development with it just to save chemical, but if the dilutions are generous or I can get away with other chemicals, I could use my daylight tank and the taco method just to make it even simpler. No darkroom space needed. <br /><br />For the record, I love printing in the darkroom and absolutely like to work more traditionally and make proper prints when I have time, but right now I'm looking to churn out portraits and amass a nice quantity of images. <br /><br />Any thoughts are welcome!</p>

<p>Hi All,<br> So I'm going to be starting a portrait project in the next few weeks. Planning on using a 4x5 crown graphic. I'm leaning towards using this <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1208400-REG/slavich_glx500351_galaxy_hyper_speed_direct.html">Galaxy Hyperspeed</a> direct positive paper. Leaning towards DPP for ease of use. From the examples I've been able to find, the tone is really nice and it looks pretty low maintenance.<br> For now this will just be part of a digital portfolio for grad school applications and I only have a few months to get things sorted before applications are due.<br /><br />I'm hoping that not having to print or scan actual film will save me time. Also hoping using this RC paper will make it more forgiving than film when it comes to developing. I do have a darkroom space, but it's not set up very well and I really want to keep this as simple as possible which is the whole reason to go with DPP over sheet film. <br /><br /> <a href="http://www.adorama.com/glx500365.html">Here</a> are the chemicals to develop it.<br /><br />Anyone have experience with this stuff? Tips for using it etc? <br /><br />Anyone have other development processes other than their system that they use with it?<br> <br />I was thinking I would probably do tray development with it just to save chemical, but if the dilutions are generous or I can get away with other chemicals, I could use my daylight tank and the taco method just to make it even simpler. No darkroom space needed. <br /><br />For the record, I love printing in the darkroom and absolutely like to work more traditionally and make proper prints when I have time, but right now I'm looking to churn out portraits and amass a nice quantity of images. <br /><br />Any thoughts are welcome!<br> </p> <p> </p>

<p>Thanks all. I will plan to develop as normal and hope for the best. I'll try to remember to share a link to the scans once I finish. </p>

<p>The scene was haystack rock, cannon beach... Overcast sunrise, sun behind me - with ocean, beach, overcast sky and big black rocks... I am guessing that I may just wind up developing it normal and enjoying extra detail in the shadow hahaha. </p>

<p>Thank you both. It was an overcast day and I did a lot of bracketing as well so I may be able to just roll with standard dev and hope for the best. <br> Just testing the meter in typical sunlit day the exposure jump approx 3-4 stops. </p>

<p>It's a sekonic l-308... What do you mean by you have the film indexed for that? Assuming you mean that you set the meter to the correct film speed?</p>

<p>Hi All,<br> Made the epic mistake of leaving the white plastic bubble for incident metering over the sensor when taking a reflective reading of a landscape. I was in a rush and not paying attention, shot two rolls before I came to my senses. To clarify, I did not take an incidental reading, but a reflective reading with the incident bubble on. <br /><br />Anyone here make a similar mistake and manage to save it in development? <br> Just from testing the meter I think the film was overexposed by 3-4 stops at least, but really have no idea what the exposure difference the incident bubble would have. <br /><br />I did bracket my exposures quite a bit, so I am hoping I can come out with something usable by pulling the film in development... <br /><br />Not knowing exactly the difference in exposure and with a range of exposure on each roll... this will be a crap shoot either way. I would rather have some over exposed negs, than under develop. I am thinking a - 2 development might yield something usable. <br /><br />Any ideas??<br> HP5 film, planned to use Adox Rodinal to develop. </p>