Blog Comments

This is a wonderful video, Joe! I hope that we meet one day.

PS: I've altered the video's privacy settings so that now it's publically viewable.

great, touching story Joe and a wonderful image to go with it! Thanks!

I see your keyboard has the optional poiuy key order.
Treasure these times, Joe - as you pointed out, they are fleeting.

I have been thinking of trying paper negatives and wonder how to pre-flash. The video was very good and provided all the info I need to start. Thanks.

I have been tinkering with the idea of buying one of the new Ilford Obscura 5x4 camera's but your camera with a compartment for exposed and unexposed store paper, or, film is a much superior design. I may have to build one.

I must say it sounds like a wonderful day. I am sure some of it will rub off.

A good video Joe. You explain everything really well so maybe the words are all needed
I agree that there is no value in stripping the emulsion.
I have plenty of experience of doing this to make canvas mounted portraits and it is tricky.
You must strip an even thickness of the backing all over and you must be careful not to stretch the emulsion out of shape.
And contact printing works fine through the paper. It is surprising how little difference it makes to the exposure.

Colin,

In the video I addressed this by showing what the paper negative looks like from the perspective of the print paper underneath, with the paper negative backlit as it would be using the light source. In that example (backlit by a light box for the purposes of making it easy to see in the video), the full tone of the negative image is clearly seen through the translucent paper backing of the RC negative, from the darkest shadows to the brightest highlights.

I see no reason to peel apart the emulsion from a paper negative, I am pleased enough with the resulting contact prints, which you can see for yourself in the video.

I know other people report having done this emulsion peeling, but I have nothing to add on that subject. If cost were the concern for not using conventional sheet film, medical x-ray film is reported to work very well and can be very inexpensive, and in my opinion would be preferable to peeling paper emulsions.

Thanks for watching the video.

~Joe

Great clip Joe.

Just one question about your contact prints. I haven't made contact prints from paper negs for so many years is was in the days before RC papers and the main problem was the thick fibre base I guess with the new thin resin coatings this isn't so much a problem. In one of Ned's threads I asked if he re-moves the paper backing when printing paper negs by contact, I wonder if you have any thoughts on this?

Colin

PS I did make a twin light reflex printer for paper negs it worked just fine only one slight problem with reflections because the negs where not 100% flat in the carrier .

My Gossen is the older type should run on two 1.35 v cells , the new 1.5 v give a reading about two stops over

You're as young as your feel - or young as you look? I'm 56, so judge for yourselves.

I do intend on more instructional videos, and preflash exposures would be a good topic.

~Joe

Great stuff Joe, you're younger that I had imagined! Another vote for something on correct exposure paper negs!

I really enjoyed the video Joe! thanks for making and sharing it! I think a couple of videos on paper negs and the DPP would be very well received... but I do understand that overcoming the inertia of procrastination can be difficult

onward!

Jefrey;

Yes! I want to do a series of videos about this whole paper negative (and Harman DPP) plus pinhole camera-making genre. Much depends on my motivation, and ability to overcome procrastination!

thank you very much for the video! love your work! do you have any plans on doing video about the art of pre-flashing? i would really like to learn. i will try to put more time on reading about this. thanks again!

Ray,

No, as far as I know they're the original cells, though the meter was recently calibrated by Quality Light Metric of Hollywood, Ca. It is very sensitive, however. I know there are older types of Gossen meter cells, this meter is the type that runs off a 9v battery.

Great clip Joe

Question about you Gossen light meter have you changed the cells for the newer type that are just a tad stronger in voltage?

In my haste to shoot this footage I failed to mention that I cut the paper down from 8" x 10" sheets into 5" x 8" pieces in the darkroom, prior to preflashing and loading into the camera. The extra 1/2" margin on either side of the image area is where the magnetic mounts contact the paper.

Also, the audio got garbled right at the point where I was explaining that I reference the exposure time for f/128 on the meter, then multiply by the camera's correction factor.

The way this correction factor gets calculated is (333/128)^2, where the 333 is my camera's focal ratio and the 128 is the ratio I'm referencing on the light meter. Divide these two numbers, then square the result. I recommend using the highest f-stop available on your meter, as it introduces less measurement error.

Since the focal ratio and metering method remains constant for any individual camera, the resulting calculation becomes a constant, which I fix to the camera body with a label maker. I then use a calculator out in the field to do the conversion prior to making the exposure. In the video, the meter recommended 12 seconds for f/128, and with the conversion factor it amounts to about 82 seconds, or 1 minute and 22 seconds.

Thanks for posting this wonderful article Joe! Much appreciated!