Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / October 2006
Printing from Negative Film Vs. from Positive Film
|
|
Thread rating:  |
tigresdelrio@gmail.com - 09 Oct 2006 09:12 GMT Is the process of printing from a negative similar to, or exactly the same as, printing from a positive?
Thanks.
UC - 09 Oct 2006 14:01 GMT > Is the process of printing from a negative similar to, or exactly the > same as, printing from a positive? > > Thanks. Yes and no.
Claudio Bonavolta - 09 Oct 2006 14:17 GMT tigresdelrio@gmail.com a écrit :
> Is the process of printing from a negative similar to, or exactly the > same as, printing from a positive? > > Thanks. They are similar in that you expose a surface and develop it but the type of surface and development differ.
Positive processes are rare now as I don't think there are any commercial for B/W (it's possible to use DIY formulas) and, in color, only Ilfochrome remains (all manufacturers have abandoned concurrent R-3 processes).
You should precise somewhat better what kind of information you're looking for.
Claudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch
beer - 09 Oct 2006 20:29 GMT Claudio Bonavolta ha escrito:
> They are similar in that you expose a surface and develop it but the > type of surface and development differ. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Claudio Bonavolta > http://www.bonavolta.ch hi claudio i develop my slide with jobo system but the i have more difficult to buy ilfochrome product. i'd like to buy focomat v35 as enlarger for printing in cibachrome but, in italy , i do not find every ilforchrom supplier so the positive process is, for me , like a chimera. cheers, Emilio.
Claudio Bonavolta - 10 Oct 2006 10:02 GMT beer a écrit :
> Claudio Bonavolta ha escrito: > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > cheers, > Emilio. Hi Emilio,
I know Ilfochrome distribution is still chaotic in Italy, unfortunately, I don't know who is the official distributor. If you're close to Switzerland, then you can order here from any shop (provided they want to). If not, try to go through mail-order or websites that sell it. There should be some in Europe (Germany or France): - http://www.nordfoto.de/shops/amateur_chemikalien_e_6_fuer_farbdiafilm.html - http://www.nightlight.fr/COULEUR.HTM - http://www.prophot.fr/rev/prophot?page=liste&groupe=3&famille=233 - http://www.prophot.fr/rev/prophot?page=liste&groupe=2&famille=208 Just a few addresses quickly found via Google, you may find cheaper prices in searching better than I did. Ordering from the US may be problematic due to the air restrictions for chemicals and shipment cost may be prohibitive. You can check with big shops like B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com). I prefer the CLM.1K surface which has the typical high-gloss surface and a medium contrast usable with moderate burn and dodge. Note there is a new chemicals kit P3.5 which is a 5 liters kit splitted in 1-liter internal packages. P-30 kits now means old chemicals ...
Regarding the V35, it's a fine enlarger for Ilfochrome, but check it is in good shape with the genuine Focotar lens. I see regularly strange things on sale on eBay ... Its only drawback is its limitation to the 35mm format.
Un salutone, Claudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch
tigresdelrio@gmail.com - 09 Oct 2006 20:42 GMT > Positive processes are rare now as I don't think there are any > commercial for B/W (it's possible to use DIY formulas) and, in color, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You should precise somewhat better what kind of information you're > looking for. I apologize for I am a novice, and I am looking to learn more about photography, in general.
But, in regards to my question about printing positive vs. negative film, I am looking for more information about producing a print from positive film. I have knowledge of how to produce a print from negative film -- using the enlarger, putting the paper in the baths of chemicals, etc.
Is this the same process in producing a print from positive film -- just with different chemicals? This answer may seem obvious to some of you, but I am learning by myself, and any insights are helpful and useful to me.
Thank you. P.S. What is the R-3 process? Do any of you have informational photography websites I could peruse?
UC - 09 Oct 2006 20:53 GMT > > Positive processes are rare now as I don't think there are any > > commercial for B/W (it's possible to use DIY formulas) and, in color, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > negative film -- using the enlarger, putting the paper in the baths of > chemicals, etc.
> Is this the same process in producing a print from positive film -- > just with different chemicals? No, it isn't, and yes, it is.
> This answer may seem obvious to some of > you, but I am learning by myself, and any insights are helpful and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > P.S. What is the R-3 process? Do any of you have informational > photography websites I could peruse? Alfred T B - 10 Oct 2006 00:32 GMT >> > Positive processes are rare now as I don't think there are any >> > commercial for B/W (it's possible to use DIY formulas) and, in color, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > No, it isn't, and yes, it is. How is it the same and where does it differ?
syncopator@gmail.com - 10 Oct 2006 06:48 GMT > > No, it isn't, and yes, it is. > > > How is it the same and where does it differ? Google for Ilfochrome and Cibachrome. Here's a site with a description of some of what's involved:
http://www.lightroom.com/lr_pages/ilfo_info.html
I looked into it myself some time ago. Like processing color prints from negatives it takes temperature stabilized chemicals, but with Ilfochrome/Cibachrome it takes one extra bath-- so if you, for example, want to use a Nova slot processor you'll want to get the one with 4 slots instead of the usual 3. Or if you use a Jobo tube system you'll do an extra chemistry step. It's probably possible to set up an automated processor to do it as well, if you got the $$$ but again, you'd have to find one with the requisite chemistry sections. Then you must hope that Ilfo won't discontinue the materials.
The local Jr. College recently updated their darkroom and unfortunately, ripped out their Cibachrome lab-- just as I started taking some color classes there. Quite dissapointing as I wanted to get my hands wet with it a bit to see exactly what I would be in for if I were to try it in my home darkroom. There's probably folks on this newsgroup that have done it before though, if you can get their attention.
--
Sync
Claudio Bonavolta - 10 Oct 2006 10:17 GMT tigresdelrio@gmail.com a écrit :
> > Positive processes are rare now as I don't think there are any > > commercial for B/W (it's possible to use DIY formulas) and, in color, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I apologize for I am a novice, and I am looking to learn more about > photography, in general. No problem, we all started one day ...
> But, in regards to my question about printing positive vs. negative > film, I am looking for more information about producing a print from > positive film. I have knowledge of how to produce a print from > negative film -- using the enlarger, putting the paper in the baths of > chemicals, etc. I suppose you're talking B/W ? Basically, there are an inversion and re-development additional steps. I have a page on B/W slides that describes the general idea: http://www.bonavolta.ch/hobby/en/photo/slidesbw.htm
One difficulty with positive slides is that they have a pretty high contrast. An usual B/W negative is pretty low in contrast, so the relative paper to print on should have a higher contrast to compensate. Your positive being high in contrast, using a paper having a high contrast too may give an excessive resulting contrast. To reduce the general contrast, you must use a very soft developer with low grades. Maybe it is enough to obtain a correct result. I can't tell you for sure as I've never tried it.
Positive papers like Ilfochrome and their relative process have a natural low contrast to compensate the high contrast in the slide. When you hear that Ilfochrome gives to contrasty prints, it is the combination of the slide + the print that is still to contrasty.
> Is this the same process in producing a print from positive film -- > just with different chemicals? This answer may seem obvious to some of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > P.S. What is the R-3 process? Do any of you have informational > photography websites I could peruse? R-3 is a color positive process for prints that is (well, was) concurrent to Ilfochrome and meant to print color slides on paper. Contrary to Ilfochrome, it was a chromogenic process where the dyes were build up during the process, like in classic negative color paper (RA-4 process). Ilfochrome does contain all the dyes in the manufactured paper, the process selectively bleaches the "excessive" colors. I think (but maybe I'm wrong) all manufacturers have stopped their production of R-3 papers and chemicals.
Claudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch
Rod Smith - 11 Oct 2006 03:30 GMT > But, in regards to my question about printing positive vs. negative > film, I am looking for more information about producing a print from [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > you, but I am learning by myself, and any insights are helpful and > useful to me. It's the same in broad strokes, but the details differ. One important difference is that increasing exposure makes a print from a negative darker, whereas it makes a print from a positive lighter. (Assuming you're processing to get a normal print, not a reverse-image print.) If you're talking about color prints, the effects of the filters will be reversed, too. For instance, increasing cyan filtration when making a color print from a negative makes the print more red (less cyan), but when making a print from a slide, increasing cyan filtration makes the print less red (more cyan).
> P.S. What is the R-3 process? Do any of you have informational > photography websites I could peruse? Don't worry too much about R-3; the paper and chemicals are no longer being manufactured, AFAIK. If you stumble across a stash of them, and if it's all still in date, you might be interested in buying it; but you're unlikely to find the stuff new in stores. I wouldn't recommend investing time in learning about R-3 unless it's just to satisfy your curiosity or if you find a bunch of R-3 supplies cheap. For making color prints from color slides, the only official process left is Ilfochrome (formerly known as Cibachrome).
FWIW, although Ilfochrome is the only remaining "official" process for making prints from color slides, it's possible to make color prints from slides using conventional RA-4 paper. The process is to expose the paper, develop it in a conventional *B&W* developer (such as Dektol), put it in a stop bath, rinse the print, expose the print to light to fog it, and then proceed with the usual RA-4 process. The result isn't likely to match an Ilfochrome (or R-3, if you have some R-3 paper and chemicals) print for color accuracy and contrast, but you might want to play with the process. The print is likely to be high in contrast and some of the colors may be odd. The effect can be interesting for some shots.
 Signature Rod Smith, rodsmith@rodsbooks.com http://www.rodsbooks.com Author of books on Linux, FreeBSD, and networking
Greg "_" - 12 Oct 2006 02:14 GMT
> FWIW, although Ilfochrome is the only remaining "official" process for > making prints from color slides, it's possible to make color prints from [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The print is likely to be high in contrast and some of the colors may be > odd. The effect can be interesting for some shots. I actually learned something here today. Thank you.
 Signature Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back.
www.gregblankphoto.com
Tom Phillips - 12 Oct 2006 02:48 GMT Greg \"_\" wrote:
> > FWIW, although Ilfochrome is the only remaining "official" process for > > making prints from color slides, it's possible to make color prints from [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I actually learned something here today. Thank you. Careful. You'll start a trend, and then where would r.p.d be? Everyone exchanging mutual knowledge and actually learning something... ;^)
Greg "_" - 12 Oct 2006 03:11 GMT > Greg \"_\" wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > would r.p.d be? Everyone exchanging mutual > knowledge and actually learning something... ;^) This is one of the best rec photo groups, maybe because long ago I filtered the crack pots out.
 Signature Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back.
www.gregblankphoto.com
Tom Phillips - 12 Oct 2006 03:38 GMT Greg \"_\" wrote:
> > Greg \"_\" wrote: > > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > This is one of the best rec photo groups, maybe because long ago > I filtered the crack pots out. Crackpots, or crack heads. Sometimes I wonder :)
Lloyd Erlick - 12 Oct 2006 14:02 GMT On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:20:22 -0400, "Greg \"_\"" <grey_egg@greg_photo.com> wrote:
>This is one of the best rec photo groups, maybe because long ago >I filtered the crack pots out. October 12, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,
That's no doubt true, but I think in reality the crackpot factor in this ng is fairly low. We get pretty bugged by it when it appears, though, no doubt about that, but still, it's minor.
For a more entertaining crackpot view, check in on tor.general, supposedly a Toronto-centric newsgroup. Plenty of political, racist and personal invective, enough for all.
regards, --le ________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto. website: www.heylloyd.com telephone: 416-686-0326 email: portrait@heylloyd.com ________________________________ --
Greg "_" - 12 Oct 2006 23:37 GMT > On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:20:22 -0400, "Greg > \"_\"" <grey_egg@greg_photo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > email: portrait@heylloyd.com > ________________________________ True I was mostly referring to the foul language users. I have most of the most basic stuff filtered from ever appearing.
 Signature Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back.
www.gregblankphoto.com
Tom Phillips - 13 Oct 2006 02:22 GMT Greg \"_\" wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:20:22 -0400, "Greg > > \"_\"" <grey_egg@greg_photo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > True I was mostly referring to the foul language users. I have most of > the most basic stuff filtered from ever appearing. Plus usually they seem to have the least substance to contribute. Such as (just catching up on my nsg reading here...)
> What is formalin used for in a darkroom. Found a bottle of it. > Does it have any use in black and white photography? I don't know; can you use it to kill yourself if your prints turn out shitty?
Greg "_" - 13 Oct 2006 04:44 GMT > > What is formalin used for in a darkroom. Found a bottle of it. > > Does it have any use in black and white photography? > > I don't know; can you use it to kill yourself if your prints turn out > shitty? I don't know I 'd say there are quite few better darkroom chemistries to off one self. Isn't there a reason Amidol comes in a skull and cross bone package??? Maybe get some mercury and take a stab at fulminating it onto mirror glass :)
 Signature Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back.
www.gregblankphoto.com
Tom Phillips - 13 Oct 2006 08:06 GMT Greg \"_\" wrote:
> > > What is formalin used for in a darkroom. Found a bottle of it. > > > Does it have any use in black and white photography? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > bone package??? Maybe get some mercury and take a stab at fulminating > it onto mirror glass :) Think I'd rather stand on a mountain top waiting for lightning to strike. I'd live longer ;)
The above, of course, is from Nebenzahl (sig = "Save the Planet, Kill Yourself.") Typical...
David Nebenzahl - 13 Oct 2006 17:03 GMT Tom Phillips spake thus:
> Greg \"_\" wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > (sig = "Save the Planet, Kill Yourself.") > Typical... Careful, Tom; your puzzling obsession with me is showing.
But you and Greg just continue your w.nker's conversation.
 Signature Save the Planet Kill Yourself
- motto of the Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
Tom Phillips - 14 Oct 2006 00:38 GMT > Careful, Tom; your puzzling obsession with me is showing. spoken like a true troll
Raphael Bustin - 16 Oct 2006 04:57 GMT >But you and Greg just continue your w.nker's conversation. Indeed, it's time for the two of them to get a room.
rafe b www.terrapinphoto.com
Tom Phillips - 16 Oct 2006 07:31 GMT > >But you and Greg just continue your w.nker's conversation. > > Indeed, it's time for the two of them to get a room. > > rafe b > www.terrapinphoto.com This from a guy knows so little about photography his best posts/replies to this nsg are ad hominems...
Greg "_" - 16 Oct 2006 12:44 GMT You missed the best part, his choice of friends: (Kill filed) Trolls.
 Signature Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back.
www.gregblankphoto.com
Greg "_" - 16 Oct 2006 12:44 GMT > Indeed, it's time for the two of them to get a room. Coming from you that's hilarious. Thanks going into monday-LOL
 Signature Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back.
www.gregblankphoto.com
|
|
|