Efke's Direct Positive Paper

[Photo Engineer]

There are three ways.

You can use a low contrast graded paper, or you can use a special Reversl P or Reversal F emulsion as an example to give a direct reversal with either a negative or reversal process with the appropriate chemistry.

PE

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Yes, right you are, Michel. Graded paper media is primarily UV/blue sensitive, although VC paper has some green sensitivity but the contrast is hard to control, as daylight predominates in the color spectrum that activates VC paper's high-contrast emulsion. I have to remind myself that 'ortho' relates to 'green'.

So, rather than referring to paper negs as 'ortho' in tonal response, should I refer to them as 'actinic', as EW did? I don't think they would properly be termed 'gas-light' paper, either, since they'll fog under a flame's illumination.

I guess I'm just seeking the proper terminology that can be agreed upon.

~Joe

I've seen "blue-sensitive" often, but "ordinary" is a term used technically to mean the same thing. A silver halide emulsion is inherently sensitive to UV/Blue only, I think, unless sensitizing dyes are added to it.

"Actinic" is simply the fogging property of a given light for a given paper: darkroom safelight is "inactinic" light.

 

[semeuse]

I've ordered some and look forward to working with it - both as a one off in LF and for printing from slides.

 

[Daniel_Buck]

My first test with this positive paper came out very dark (metered for f6.8 at ISO 6, and got 25 second exposure indoors at night). Either reciprocity kicked in, or ISO 6 is to high. Developed in dektol. I'll be doing more exposure tests later this week, I'll try and nail down the ISO at faster shutter speeds in brighter conditions, and then try and figure out the reciprocity for slower shutter speeds and darker conditions.

 

[MarcoA]

As someone who has been shooting in-camera Ilfochromes for more than two years this Efke is a dream come true. It's my B&W solution!

Two things though:

1. Does anybody know where one can buy it in Europe? Funny (well, not so funny at all...) that I have to go all the way to Freestyle, pay custom duties etc to import _back_ to the EU something that has been produced in the EU in the first place ... :-(

2. For those living in the EU there is also the Kraus Silver Gelatin Paper, another direct positive BW paper.

Cheers!

 

[Rlibersky]

I've seen in camera Ilfochromes, don't know if they are yours or not. You would not believe the life like quality of the print. If the same effect can be had with BW. WOW!

 

[Daniel_Buck]

I did some more testing this evening (just before the light went away!) And my findings mirror the findings of a member on another forum. Very high contrast! I exposed two of these exposures the same (ISO1) and developed the first in dektol 1:3 from stock solution for 3 minutes, and the second 1:6 for 6 minutes. Diluting dektol doesn't really seem to make much of a difference, they sheets look nearly identical. There is so much contrast I'm not quite sure if ISO1 is over or under, but in any case it's close. I metered the wall on the building to be my middle grey, my sky to be my highlights (2.5 stops up) and the bushes to be my shadows (2 stops down). The sky I knew would be gone (it is!) the bushes have a faint hint of texture every now and then, but for the most part, gone. THe wall however, seems to be a bit bright for 'middle ground'. I believe I placed the roof tiles at 1 stop darker than the wall on my meter (1 stop under). So I'm guessing that ISO1.5 or ISO2 would be correct, for my developing anyway. Since my wall looks brighter than 'mid grey'. If I back light the print with a strong light bulb, there is quite a bit of detail in the bushes, but hardly any of it is visible when viewing the print normal.

So, what are some ways that I can develop these with less contrast? Will diluting dektol even more do anything? Was going from 1:3 at 3 minutes, to 1:6 at 6 minutes the proper way to dillute dektol? Maybe I should try something drastic, like 1:30 at 30 minutes? I'm open to suggestions

Here's a scan of the results. I adjusted the white and black point, and curve to mate closely to what the paper looks like.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Any reversal process tends to be higher in contrast than negative processes, so you should probably expose it as if it were color slide film--meter for the highlights (but not the sky, because it's an ortho emulsion, and the sky will be white no matter what) and try to control the shadows with development.

You could reduce development time or use a softer developer, like Selectol Soft, or maybe even a soft working film developer like D-76, Microdol-X or Perceptol. A film developer might need a restrainer like KBr or benzotriazole to get clean whites with prints.

 

[Ryuji]

Direct positive emulsions are made by core-shell structure with the core pre-fogged, and the emulsion is sensitized so that any extra light exposure will actually bleach the fog center, just like in solarization effect. Some grains in the emulsion don't get enough exposure to completely bleach the pre-fogged part, and so they result in higher fog. That's a limitation from the principle. About the only way to effectively improve this is to make the grain size uniform, and control the coating weight of the emulsion very tightly. The former certainly leads to a higher contrast, again, a limitatiom from the principle.

The detail depends on the particular emulsion, but I wouldn't use a high sulfite developer like D-76 on paper products, unless you know that the emulsion is bromide based (with or without iodide).

 

[Daniel_Buck]

Direct positive emulsions are made by core-shell structure with the core pre-fogged, and the emulsion is sensitized so that any extra light exposure will actually bleach the fog center, just like in solarization effect. Some grains in the emulsion don't get enough exposure to completely bleach the pre-fogged part, and so they result in higher fog. That's a limitation from the principle. About the only way to effectively improve this is to make the grain size uniform, and control the coating weight of the emulsion very tightly. The former certainly leads to a higher contrast, again, a limitatiom from the principle.

The detail depends on the particular emulsion, but I wouldn't use a high sulfite developer like D-76 on paper products, unless you know that the emulsion is bromide based (with or without iodide).

Thanks for the info What developer would you suggest? I'm thiking about trying to find some selectol, see if that works better.

 

[MarcoA]

I've seen in camera Ilfochromes, don't know if they are yours or not. You would not believe the life like quality of the print.

As a matter of fact I do. I mean, I _really_ do

Ciao!

 

[Steve Smith]

I've seen in camera Ilfochromes, don't know if they are yours or not. You would not believe the life like quality of the print. If the same effect can be had with BW. WOW!

Some in camera Ilfochrome stuff (mainly home made cameras) here: http://www.timhunkin.com/61_cameras.htm



Steve.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

I dont recall the positive prints made by street photographers as contrasty. Weren't they similar materials?

 

[MarcoA]

I just learnt from Efke that a baryta version of this very paper will be available in September

 

[Daniel_Buck]

here's some more shots on the paper, developed in Dektol still, haven't gotten around to picking up some Selectol.

Metered for 2 stops darker than ISO 6 (that makes it ISO 1.5 I guess?), for the water shots I metered for the foam highlights and placed them one stop over middle grey.

 

[RoBBo]

Those are starting to look good.
Selectol on its own would kill those I think.
And split developing with a single sheet doesn't sound like a whole lot of fun.
I'd say you should dilute the dektol and not extend the development time.
This is what I've always been taught and it seems to work out great for me as a means of stepping down the contrast.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Daniel, I really like the look of these.

Also, I can see it as a useful means to open up new avenues of gimmickry. For example, selling them as "the ultimate contact print," because it's a "direct imprint of reality onto paper in an edition of 1/1"

 

[Colin Corneau]

I'm looking into making a small-room sized camera obscura/pinhole -- and using this paper tiled could make a great large print of a scene. I'll be watching this thread for more info, and a positive paper could work really well for this idea...many thanks.

 

[Daniel_Buck]

Daniel, I really like the look of these.

Also, I can see it as a useful means to open up new avenues of gimmickry. For example, selling them as "the ultimate contact print," because it's a "direct imprint of reality onto paper in an edition of 1/1"

Thanks I do enjoy the "one off-ness" of shooting paper. I really enjoyed shooting paper in college when I was building all kinds of pinhole cameras. But the thing I never liked about them was that they were always inverted, since there was no positive paper (or, none that I knew of). Shooting this positive paper is bringing back that fun of the 'one off' print that I enjoyed with my pin hole shooting! Though, I suppose it's not truely a one-off, since you could probably still make a contact print with these (like with paper negatives?), and you can certainly scan them. But it's still alot of fun! And cheap to! I can't remember exactly, but I think it's about $1 per sheet.

There are 4x5 papers available as well, for much less, but 4x5 is a little to small for print size, at least for me. Could be fun for portraits though!

 

[keithwms]

Daniel those look very nice. Alas I have not yet gotten good blacks from the stuff. Your blacks look convincing, mine look grey. Mind you, my vat of PQ has been open for a few months, maybe that's it. Need to do some more tests.

 

[Daniel_Buck]

Keith, the blacks on mine are very much black. I believe I read somewhere that the paper is already "pre fogged" a tad bit? (this may have been a different Efke paper though, I'm not certain), you aren't doing any additional fogging/flashing are you?

Some of the shadows I can hold up against a bright light (behind the paper) and see a bit more detail in the shadows, but without back-lighting the blacks are black.

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Daniel these shots that you have posted look very good to me. very good detail as far as I can see. Something to try. let us know of any other results.

Jim

 

[Whiteymorange]

Not to drag an old thread out of retirement for the fun of it, but I just bought a box of this paper for pinholes with kids (4x4x6 boxes and 51 seventh grade boys) and I'd love to know if anyone did end up using Selectol soft and how it went. Diluted Sprint worked Ok but the scene was very flat anyway- I rated the paper at ISO 2 and got an acceptable image. Any further work been done with it since the last posting?

 

[mhcfires]

I just got a pack of 5x7 Efke Positive Paper. I will be attempting to use it. Thanks to this old thread, I may have a starting point on how to expose and develop it.

 

[fiducio]

I bought some as well in 4x5, and I'm tempting an entire portrait series done on it, my testing stages are over with it, and it is indeed best rated at 1.5. Another interesting note is this stuff polarizes when attempting to shoot with flash, will post some results of that unique characteristic...
But... It really brings out all the imperfections of skin.