First attempt at reversal processing B&W paper....

[Existing Light]

... was a failure

I tried printing a black and white slide of my (now deceased) golden retriever just a little while ago. It's a slide of her out in the snow.

The print was a test print, made in 5 second intervals

My process:

Develop in Dektol 1:2 for 2 minutes

5 minutes in potassium permanganate bleach

3 minutes in sodium metabisulfite clear bath

Rinse

Re-exposeed about a foot away from a 100watt bare bulb for two minutes on each side of the paper

Redeveloped in dektol for 3 minutes


The print came out black. There was a lighter area where the dog was standing, but the rest of the frame was black (the rest of the frame was snow). The side with the less exposure was lighter, a dark grey, but still same phenomenon

I think this might be solarization from too much exposure during re-exposure. Any ideas?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

You may have experienced a problem that people new to reversal processing experience. Everything works contrary to normal processing. If the print or slide is too dense then you have to correct this by increasing the exposure. Remember too that if you use an easel the print borders will be black. Most people have to stop and think before each print. Soon it will become second nature.

You can also skip the re-exposure and use a fogging developer to get sepia tones.

 

[Existing Light]

Thanks for the reply. I've reversal processed black and white film before to project, but I've never printed it before. I did make a few more prints, and i'm getting a negative of my positive when I reveral process my paper. The ony things I can think of are I'm re-exposing too long, causing the positive image to solarize an cause it to become a negative or I'm not exposing enough when printing. Of course, I could be, and most likely am, completely wrong

 

[tkamiya]

Can't you just scan it and reverse it?

.... runs for cover and ducks behind a boulder

 

[mrred]

The print came out black because it was not exposed / developed long enough. Going by the development times, it is way too short.

Unlike most pan films, you can develop by inspection (safe light). Keep it going. With Dektol / Film, I need 12 mins - and that's with iso 100. Paper is, about 6?

 

[Existing Light]

Can't you just scan it and reverse it?

dont have a film scanner

.... runs for cover and ducks behind a boulder

No need to hide from me. If I had a good film scanner (that Imacon whateveritscalled or something similar/better), I'd have no problem with your idea

It's an intelectual thing, too, I guess. I got to wondering how well a black and white slide would look printed. I mean, if color printers can get good prints from color slides with the Ilfochrome process, I see no reason why us black and white folks should be "stuck" with transparencies projected on a screen (not that I'd have a problem with that).

I used the last bit of my sodium bisulfate today, so I gotta get this right tonight or I'll have to wait till I order from Photoformulary again :eek:

 

[Existing Light]

The print came out black because it was not exposed / developed long enough. Going by the development times, it is way too short.

Unlike most pan films, you can develop by inspection (safe light). Keep it going. With Dektol / Film, I need 12 mins - and that's with iso 100. Paper is, about 6?

With film, I need about 12 minutes constant agitation in paper strength Dektol. I had no idea paper required more development than usual as well. I'll give that a try and see what happens. Thanks for the tip

 

[Roger Cole]

dont have a film scanner




No need to hide from me. If I had a good film scanner (that Imacon whateveritscalled or something similar/better), I'd have no problem with your idea

If you really want to do it in hybrid mode you only need a print scanner. Just make a print on paper and develop normally. Then scan the negative print and invert digitally.

Or to keep it "pure" be sure to use paper without markings on the back and contact print the negative print onto another sheet, exposing through the back.

Better yet do what folks did with color slides before direct positive papers and just make an internegative on black and white film. I'd think it would pick up contrast so you may need to develop it flat and/or print on soft paper but it shouldn't be too hard.

 

[mrred]

With film, I need about 12 minutes constant agitation in paper strength Dektol. I had no idea paper required more development than usual as well. I'll give that a try and see what happens. Thanks for the tip

The same rules apply. You know when you develop too much when the highlights get blown. Too dark, is not enough.

 

[Existing Light]

If you really want to do it in hybrid mode you only need a print scanner. Just make a print on paper and develop normally. Then scan the negative print and invert digitally.

Or to keep it "pure" be sure to use paper without markings on the back and contact print the negative print onto another sheet, exposing through the back.

Better yet do what folks did with color slides before direct positive papers and just make an internegative on black and white film. I'd think it would pick up contrast so you may need to develop it flat and/or print on soft paper but it shouldn't be too hard.

I dont think there's going to be a need for a hybrid process or use of a paper negative. I've got a print; however it's probably the worst looking print I've made since my first printing session in my first darkroom class, but I do have a positive print from a black and white slide. It's a bit contrasty, but I expected that; it's a dog in the snow, and the snow was overexposed so much that I lost most of the detail in it except for her shadow.

I used Arista VC paper, so I guess next step is to perfect the exposure and use a contrast filter to get the contrast how I like it. I'm getting tired (mostly from thinking so much ), so I might wait till my next order of chemicals from photoformulary to finish tweaking and perfecting.

Thanks for talking me through this, folks. I needed the apug breaks to learn, clear my mind, and talk this process through with people who actually know what they're doing

 

[Smudger]

I reckon you should try contact printing a paper neg. Simply make the best projection print you can,on paper with no reverse-side makers imprints, and sandwich it to get your positive. There are heaps of threads on this.
If you had many to do, rephotographing the slide has worked well for me,but you do need pretty specialised gear to do a good job.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

EL,

Until recently Kodak made a panchromatic RC paper called Panalure intended for making prints from color negatives. To get the best results from color slides you really need to reversal process a panchromatic paper. After Kodak stopped making papers there remained an european company that still made such a paper. But they may have also stopped manufacture due to lack of demand. I would see if you could obtain either of these papers.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Another possibility would be to make an internegative using a slow sheet film and then contact print this.

 

[Roger Cole]

EL,

Until recently Kodak made a panchromatic RC paper called Panalure intended for making prints from color negatives. To get the best results from color slides you really need to reversal process a panchromatic paper. After Kodak stopped making papers there remained an european company that still made such a paper. But they may have also stopped manufacture due to lack of demand. I would see if you could obtain either of these papers.

He has a black and white slide not a color one so he has no need at all for a panchromatic paper.

I don't really understand "no need for a paper negative" just because he has a print that is one of his worst. So with a convoluted improvised reversal process one can get a bad print and this is somehow preferable to a pretty simple straightforward process likely to yield a decent print?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

He has a black and white slide

Saw slide and my mind fixated on that. Most people who want a print from a slide have a color slide.

 

[Roger Cole]

Saw slide and my mind fixated on that. Most people who want a print from a slide have a color slide.

Yep. But there was Scala and other films can be reversal processed.

I've been tempted to do some black and white slides myself but stopped short due to what he's running into - not nearly as easy to print well as a negative is, if I decided I wanted prints.

 

[Existing Light]

I don't really understand "no need for a paper negative" just because he has a print that is one of his worst. So with a convoluted improvised reversal process one can get a bad print and this is somehow preferable to a pretty simple straightforward process likely to yield a decent print?

I was figuring out the process of reversal processing paper. Now all that's left is for me to tweak the process a bit, and I should consistently be good prints.

Never did I saw that bad print was as good as it's going to get. When I get another chance to print, I should be able to tweak the process to get what I want. For this session, I was just happy I got the process to work.

I am aware of the process of making paper negatives and then printing those, but I dont see how that would be any faster or more convenient. I'd have to develop those prints, wait for them to dry, store them until I can print them, and then print them. The reversal printing process takes a while for each individual print, but I do have a positive print when i'm done. It looks like all I have left is to perfect contrast and I'm good to go. I personally dont have any contrast filters; I've borrowed some from the school darkroom, so I'll be ordering some when I get paid

In my mind, the only advantage I can see to having a paper negative is the paper negative isnt ran through a bleach or clear bath. I dont know how well that stuff will wash out of FB paper... I guess I'll make some good prints and see how long they last before I see any damage. If they deteriorate within a few weeks or months, I guess I'll go the paper neg route



EDIT:
I hope this post doesnt seem like i'm ranting or bashing anyone; i'm really not. This is just a process I was curious about. I might end up doing paper negs when I print slides. At the very least, I can say I've reversal processed paper, and that seems worth the time for me to figure it out

 

[erikg]

I did this when I was in school, just to see if I could make it work. I did, but I never used it for anything. It was an interesting exercise though. I'd have to dig up my notes but I do remember having some staining issues with the paper. I recall that I overcame that, but I'd have to look to see how. I also remember staining my fingers and fingernails being careless one night. I'd avoid that, it took weeks for the stain to grow out of my nails.

 

[Roger Cole]

EDIT:
I hope this post doesnt seem like i'm ranting or bashing anyone; i'm really not. This is just a process I was curious about. I might end up doing paper negs when I print slides. At the very least, I can say I've reversal processed paper, and that seems worth the time for me to figure it out

Totally understandable and fair enough. If I'd read the original post as "I think it's cool to play around with this unusual process" I'd have never suggested a paper negative or film internegative. I was reading it as, "what's the best way to get a good print from this slide of my dearly departed dog?" That might well be a different question and a different problem.

 

[brucemuir]

Existing,
keep us updated on your progress please.

 

[Existing Light]

Totally understandable and fair enough. If I'd read the original post as "I think it's cool to play around with this unusual process" I'd have never suggested a paper negative or film internegative. I was reading it as, "what's the best way to get a good print from this slide of my dearly departed dog?" That might well be a different question and a different problem.

No worries

When I get the reversal process down for paper, I'll give a paper neg a shot and see which one turns out better, if there's really much of a difference in the final print at all.

Existing,
keep us updated on your progress please.

I'll do my best

 

[2F/2F]

Chalk me up as one more vote for the internegative route. You can use litho film in a highly diluted film developer if you are on a budget. You can go straight to the size of film that you want the print to be, and then contact print the neg. Or you can go to an intermediate size, such as 4x5. I would go with the latter route in most cases, as contact printing is more difficult than enlarging IME.