Thanks for the reply! I mostly shoot color negative film but occasionally you just need the VelviaYou're going to have to do a LOT of testing to nail it I'm afraid Nicholas !
Firstly, you can't use Endura film for duplicating slides because it's a colour negative - positive system.
So just like any other 'blind' and fresh start up, you will need to test your printing with multiple exposures and colour balances - but for starters, try this.....
( assuming you're enlarging 120 / 6x6 to 10"x8" with a standard colour head enlarger with tungsten lamp ).
Set colour filters at 70C + 65Y
Stop the lens down by two stops.
Make several exposures across the sheet at .... 2" 4" 6" 8" 12"
Process, evaluate and test again.
Notes:
CDU is quite old now and much of it is off ( low D-max / low contrast / crossed curves ), so you may be on a losing battle before you start.
Dupe film speed can range from EI 10 to around EI 25 and is usually 'faster' than RA-4 paper.
Unless you're using a pro lab ( and spending a small fortune 10"x8" E-6 processing ), don't expect accurate matching - unfortunately it's just not possible with 'uncontrolled' home processing ( but might be good enough for lightbox displays ).
Every film type can have a different colour balance ( even the same manufacturer and type... eg. Fuji RDP / RHP / RA etc... ).
Good luck !
John S
Do you have any tips on "flashing?" Does it involve a calibrated uniform exposure or a repeat of the same?Masking is a complex subject in its own right. Ciba transparent display film had to be masked similarly to Ciba print material. But today's RA4 display materials need to either be laser printed after a scan, or directly from color negs via optical enlargement, or via some kind of interneg if a chrome original is involved. Velvia has very high contrast to begin with unless the original scene contrast itself was especially mild. That means, going straight to the repro stage - in this case, hypothetically a big transparency - either the highlights or low values, or both, will be nearly impossible to reproduce. The native high contrast of the Velvia original becomes exaggerated in the reproduction. Second, the dyes in Velvia aren't particularly compatible with those in most RA4 materials. The quality of color repro can be quite ifffy. I have gotten a number of superb RA4 prints from large format Velvia originals, but there's quite a trick to doing the internegs correctly. And I've had some bellyflops too, trying to find out just how far I could get away with this. A lot of work went into finding the sweet spot in the respective film curves. I don't want to discourage anyone, but am just being realistic. Better internegs than ever can be made with current film; but I can't personally imagine doing it well without masking.
Official interneg films were designed to do the task by themselves, often with supplementary flashing. With a typical Velvia original involved, you'd have to flash so strongly that the effect would carry across a range so wide that it would likely muddy up things across the board. But like I already stated, I simply don't flash in the lab, since I already have all the gear an experience necessary for very precise masking. (I do sometimes flash original film shots in the field, specifically Ektar to offset its cyan imbalance in shadows). Print flashing is more general, while masking can be highly targeted for specific hue and density distribution. Maybe someone else could coach you on flashing methods in the darkroom. If you enjoy experimenting, and can tolerate some inevitable bellyflops, then by all means, give it a try. But getting good consistent results seems to take quite a patient track record of surviving the bellyflops first.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?