Robert and list,

I can't wait to try it. Rick suggested very dilute HC110, I will try
Rodinal 1:100 first, just because I have that.  I was reading a very old
copy of The Amateur Photographer's Handbook in which Sussman advocates
the use of Kodak High Contrast Copy Film with H&W Control developer. 
The claims the author makes for this emulsion/developer combo sound a
lot like Tech Pan. It makes me even more curious about experimenting to
see if I can fnd a developer that will get more useful tones from this
film. Does anybody remember anything about this combo or this developer?
I don't know AA's water bath technique, I will have to do some more
reading.

Gene Johnson

Robert Stoddard wrote:
> 
>   You need a highly compensating developer (high dilution and infrequent
> agitation) or the water-bath technique used by Ansel Adams.  Both have the
> effect of exhausting the developer in heavily exposed areas before
> development has proceeded to a very high density, while continuing
> development in the lightly exposed areas of the negative.  RKS
> 
> >From: Gene Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Developing ortho copy film, (was Halation)
> >Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 07:38:57 -0800
> >
> >Alan and list,
> >
> >I printed some of the negatives from the copy film last night and was
> >very disapointed.  Like I said before, the parts that had reasonable
> >density on the neg were pretty impressive, but the great majority of the
> >frames were either almost blocked up or super thin.  I have to compress
> >the contrast somehow.  I'm going to take one more stab at the Rodinal,
> >and my guess is to try less development.  Maybe go from 10 min to 6 or 8
> >min.  After that, I still have the message from Rick Dingus outlining
> >the use of HC110 for this purpose, and will give that a try in any
> >case.  I also had something from Masrc, but I can't find that now.
> >Marc, if you wouldn't mind sending that again, I'd love to have it. Kind
> >of fun, all it costs is the developer. I really have to finish my 4x5
> >project now, since being able to develop one sheet at a time (under a
> >red safelight!) would make the experimentation easier.
> >
> >Gene
> >
> >Alan Zinn wrote:
> > >
> > > At 12:14 PM 11/13/01 -0800, you wrote:
> > > >Hello all,
> > > >
> > > >I've just finished developing a roll Kodak High Resolution Aerial Copy
> > > >film.  I had cut and rolled a strip of it and put it in my old
> > > >Rolleiflex.  I took a series of shots of the landscape in front of my
> > > >house to get an idea of the film speed. The resulting negatives are
> > > >certainly interesting.  The cloudy sky is very dense compared to the
> > > >ground, which I expected.  But something strange has happened I cannot
> > > >explain.  I have much more detail of the houses etc. at 8 and 4 sec and
> > > >also at 1/2 sec.  At 2 sec and especially at 1 sec the ground detail is
> > > >almost gone.  This film has no antihalation backing.  To look at it it
> > > >is yellow and almost transparent.  Could this be halation?  I have no
> > > >idea what halation looks like on the film.  If anyone is curious, the
> > > >images that look like they are exposed about right have amazing detail.
> > > >I didn't know the little Tessar in my Rolleiflex was that good.  I will
> > > >let you all know what happens when I try to print these.  That should
> > > >happen in a couple days.  I have 500ft. of this stuff, and my plan was
> > > >to cut a bunch of 4x5 sheets from it.  Looks like it works well at
> >about
> > > >ASA 2-6.  I developed it in Rodinal for 10 min at 20 deg C.
> > > >
> > > >Gene Johnson
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >Cameramakers mailing list
> > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Gene,
> > > I used a variations of this film years ago. It is phenomenal for certain
> > > light situations but without the halation backing it is quite squirrely.
> >I
> > > think it is more sensitive to I/R. It is best in overcast light and does
> > > well with foggy weather. It has a pronounced adjacency effect in sunlit
> > > scenes. I have 35mm pictures that are almost unbelievably fine grained.
> >The
> > > negs are sort of erie and beautiful without the halation backing.
> > >
> > > AZ
> > > Maker of Lookaround panoramic camera.
> > >
> > > www.geocities.com/soho/gallery/8874/
> > >          or
> > > keyword.com lookaround
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Cameramakers mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers
> >_______________________________________________
> >Cameramakers mailing list
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cameramakers mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers
_______________________________________________
Cameramakers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers

Reply via email to