Enlarged Negatives from Agfa Scala - II

[Sanjay Sen]

Time to start a new thread on this question, and hopefully some of you will chime in with your experiences...

I was wondering if anyone (here) has tried enlarging Scala slides (35 & 120) onto the Arista APHS Ortho Litho film? If you have, what developer(s) did you use?

For the purposes of enlarging to 8x10/11x14 for alternative processes, would a different dilution of a standard paper developer work for development by inspection under a red safelight? I have Cyanotype, Vandyke and Salted Paper prints in mind for these enlarged negatives.

I have some Scala slides (and some unexposed rolls still in the freezer) and this would be another way of using them. Bear in mind that the slides were "normally" exposed at the box speed and developed using Agfa's proprietary process when this was still available, and they work wonderfully well for B&W slide projection.


TIA.


Best wishes,
Sanjay

 

[david b]

You can use a very dilute dektol to develop the ortho film but my question is, can't you just shoot the positive onto larger negative film?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

You can use a very dilute dektol to develop the ortho film but my question is, can't you just shoot the positive onto larger negative film?

Yes, if you've got a larger camera, or you could do it using an enlarger, presuming you are able to control the exposure adequately.

The attractions of ortho film are--slow speed, ability to handle and develop under ordinary safelight, low cost for APHS (Ilford Ortho Plus is more expensive), and if you are just enlarging a B&W positive, there is no downside to using an ortho film instead of a pan film.

 

[Akki14]

I enlarge from normal B&W negatives, not scala. I use Ilford Multigrade 1+9, but it develops very quick - 30-40 seconds by inspection. I dunk it in some water before putting it in the tray so it slides in more easily so I've not had problems with uneven developing since I've started doing that. I'm impatient, what can I say? It works for me, that's good enough for me. I use mine for cyanotypes. I don't know if it'll give you high enough contrast for van dyke or salt prints.

 

[Sanjay Sen]

You can use a very dilute dektol to develop the ortho film but my question is, can't you just shoot the positive onto larger negative film?

I am not sure I know how to do this - using a copy stand? I am aware of the two-step process using an enlarger (as described in Bob Herbst's article), which would be a one-step process when using positive film. I plan to use the enlarger to expose the slide onto the ortho film; the question is if the exposure times will be long enough to manage with the Gralab - I don't have a digital enlarging timer. Any ideas of what approximate exposure times to expect with a "normal" B&W slide?

TIA.

 

[Akki14]

APHS Ortho Litho seems to have about the same times as paper enlargment for my B&W negatives. Not sure if this would be vastly different with Scala or not. Has an ISO of about 3, so exposure of 35mm at about 8x10 size, stopped down lens 2 stops, about 10-12seconds? You can do test strips to find this all out, you might want to stop down the lens further if you need a little more time.

 

[davido]

Sanjay,
I have been shooting Scala film for a number of years for just this reason. APHS lith film is wonderfully cheap but can be a real beast to work with. I purposely shoot low contrast images but even so, controlling contrast with the enlarged negative becomes the real issue. I have been using HC-110 diluted between 1:14 through 1:18 with stock solution from 9 to 12 minutes. My goal is to produce Vandyke prints with a good tonal range, however, if you're after a more contrasty image then using Dektol at stronger concentrations might be fine. The best way to control contrast is through developer dilution. Consistent temperature is very important. Agitation is absolutely key: especially at such low dilutions, lith film needs constant but very very subtle agitation. As far as exposure goes, from experience and also what I've read, it's hard to over-expose this stuff. So, I tend to expose longer and develop shorter. You only need to develop long enough so that the hight-lights fill in enough as to be opaque for the process. Another good hint: contact printing a finished negative with RC paper using a grade 0 filter results in an image with fairly close contrast to what you would expect to a Kalliype print or Vandyke. I constantly use RC test prints to judge how the negatives are coming.
Using Scala positive original can be a real time saver, however, contrast can be much more difficult to control than with using a two step process. Lith enlarged negatives can be tricky and frustrating at times, it all depends on your expectations.
Hope this is helpful.
david

 

[Ross Chambers]

I found that contrast gained from diffusion light source enlarging from Scala to 10x8 Maco Genius (so called Litho) film which is a similar interpositive/internegative stock was far too high.

I had better results making an enlarged positive onto the Maco Genius from a panchromatic negative, and a contact Maco Genius contact print from that negative.

My conclusion was that the Scala to internegative route was too hard for my skills in contrast control.

And the local Scala lab ceased processing it anyway.

(I ended up buying a 5x7 camera to take the "middleman" right out)

Regards - Ross