Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
8x10 colour paper in-camera negatives
-
05-04-2010 8:14pm#1As a follow up to : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055838270
I got a pile of Kodak RA4 paper and RA4 dev chemicals (using expired C-41 bleach and fix) to try and use the colour paper as a paper negative. It's a little more complicated than the B&W paper, it's heavily blue sensitive to be exposed under tungsten enlarger lamps, so it needs to be filtered to try and approximate daylight colour temp sensitivity. So first few shots below I filtered with an 85B to convert daylight into tungsten, and the recommended starting filter pack on the box of 65m 55y. For anyone not familiar with colour printing, you generally need to experiment with a colour filter pack to get the colour right on the print. Most colour enlargers have a dialable filter pack, I got a bunch of gel filters that I can put over the lens.
These two have been further corrected in post, haven't quite got the filtration down, they were originally too blue.
Both willing victims the same as the last B&W set
Processing it is a PITA as it has to be done in complete darkness, with 5 trays the way I'm doing it. Lots of slopping around and dunking fingers into chemicals to be had ...
One more interesting point is that the paper is apparently sensitive to IR aswell. This is the red channel on the picture of my dad:
Anyone who's taken IR portraits will find that familiar. It means I have to get some sort of IR cut off filter to add to my filter pack aswell. A sort of anti-fenster filter
. It makes it next to impossible to actually get a proper colour balance at the moment, but it does impart an odd otherworldly air to the portraits ... 10
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 49718
i take it they're not shot on the paper camera?DaireQuinlan wrote: »You see how quickly rumours get started ??!?
Sister:
Wife:
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
magicbastarder wrote: »i take it they're not shot on the paper camera?
Nope. One is Ektar, other one is Portra 800. Both 35mm
-edit-
oh ho ho, I see what you did there you scamp 0 -
-
magicbastarder wrote: »i think it's funny the way this thread isn't attracting many responses, even though it (and the other one quoted above) i've mailed to more people than any other thread i've seen on boards. i imagine it's because people don't really have their own frame of reference for something like this. easier to comment on something you've experience of.
I know, it confuses me too :rolleyes:
Seriously though, I didn't really ask for C&C, and I don't know what people actually WOULD C&C, given that it's about 90% technique and very little else involved, so most critique would be based on shortcomings of the approach itself. Of course working around the shortcomings and limitations of the technique is half the fun. I guess if people aren't actually interested in pursuing something similar themselves then all that's left to add is a thanks or a brief message which, don't get me wrong, I'm always happy to get
I've tended to get a much better response with regard to interest in the actual technique on flickr and APUG to a lesser extent. There are more people who are actually doing something similar, or are interested in doing it.
But thanks for all the comments and thanks though, they're appreciated !0 -
-
Tried my reversal technique yesterday evening, this was shot at asa3, then put through a first (B&W) developer (ilford multigrade 1+9) and then re-exposed. After re-exposure it was put through the full RA-4 process. Luckily you can do this with the lights on, because this is it after 30 seconds or so when I snatched it out of the developer and dumped it into a water bath. Normally it'd go for 2 minutes.
As you can see the results are a little ... underwhelming. I have to experiment with the first developer. Fresh solution of multigrade dev at 1+4 maybe, or Dektol is another dev that people have had some success with.
As it turns out, it wasn't a complete loss. I got a neat B&W conversion out of it. I just additively blended all three channels.
0 -
Advertisement