How well does enlarging paper block light

[redbandit]

This is the dumbest thing i can ask at this moment, so please bare with me.

I was checking my test prints after they dried and i saw something funny in one so i turned my enlarger on and got the negative displayed on the easel and i realized something really really bad.

The image on the exposed and developed paper was a mirror image of the image displayed on the easel.
To explain, the frame installed into the negative carrier is a portrait orientated shot of a flower with the stamens pointed to the LEFT side of the frame.

But on the exposed and developed enlargement, the stamens are pointing to the RIGHT side, ie the image is mirrored.

At first i thought it might be "putting wrong side of paper down", so i tried that and all i got was a dead sheet of paper. I DID have two random sheets in the package that when taken out like every other one, and placed into the easel, that after exposure and developing, were 100% black.

Im at the point i just want to put a baby bottle nipple on a bottle of brandy and go hide under the enlarger table.Everytime things start going good with the enlarger, wierd shit happens

 

[Buzz-01]

Are you sure you didn't put the negative into the enlarger upside down? That is the most likely scenario I'd say.

To answer your topic title, paper is somewhat translucent in most cases. It takes some more exposure but it is possible to get an image when the paper is upside down. The image will be very soft though. Ask me how I know...

 

[MattKing]

The answer to the question in the title is- not very well.
And the explanation for what you see is in the answer we gave you in the other thread - projection of a negative flips and inverts it on the print.
The image as projected on the easel will be the way it comes out. You just need to get used to using the carrier - soon it will be natural.

 

[redbandit]

please read carefully,

the projected image on the easel has the stamens on the flower bent to the left.

the image on the exposed and developed enlargement is a perfect MIRROR image of that projection.

HOW?

 

[MattKing]

We did read carefully.
When you put the negative back in to the carrier to check it later against the print, you put in upside down, compared to the way it was in there when you made the print.

 

[redbandit]

We did read carefully.
When you put the negative back in to the carrier to check it later against the print, you put in upside down, compared to the way it was in there when you made the print.

nope not reading carefully,

I never said i altered the negative in the carrier, simply that i turned it on and put the exposed and developed enlargment next to it.

Its pretty bizzarre. Like episodes of the show Monk, were he goes in and everyone is baffled that he solved the case beacuse he saw the suspect and victim both had AA pins..

 

[gone]

This is the dumbest thing i can ask at this moment,

I can be a lot dumber than that, but don't like to show off.

Besides, I don't even know what a stamen is, not really, and probably don't want to know. It does sound like the negative is flipped. Your only recourse at this point is to flip it and see what happens. Don't forget, not only can you easily flip the negative, but you can put it in upside down too. Ample opportunities to screw up. But one way out of those four HAS to be right. Except for the upside down paper, that gives you five ways.

Enlarging paper is dandy for blocking light. If it wasn't, you would be making images on your print easel.

 

[redbandit]

I can be a lot dumber than that, but don't like to show off.

Besides, I don't even know what a stamen is, not really, and probably don't want to know. It does sound like the negative is flipped. Your only recourse at this point is to flip it and see what happens. Don't forget, not only can you easily flip the negative, but you can put it in upside down too. Ample opportunities to screw up. But one way out of those four HAS to be right. Except for the upside down paper, that gives you five ways.

Enlarging paper is dandy for blocking light. If it wasn't, you would be making images on your print easel.

but there is TWO problems

1. i have not had a drink in about a month and im starting to wonder why

2. i took the paper out of the envelope the same way. i DID deliberately flip on over by accident.

the image displayed on the easel and the enlarging paper is/was OPPOSITE of how it ended up on the developed enlargement.

i took the paper off of the easel and inserted into the cibachrome tube the same way, but SOME of them after developing had the image side to the outside of the tube.

 

[MattKing]

If you put the paper into the easel upside down, the image would be faint and nor very sharp.
The paper base gets in the way.
If you put the paper into tubes the wrong way - emulsion against the wall - it shouldn't develop correctly/evenly.

 

[mshchem]

Ah Cibachrome is reversal paper . It is was, bad joke.

It's possible to print through the paper. This was a practice in graphic arts, print shops. This was/is done with extraordinarily brilliant lights, huge 500W and much higher, by contact printing.

 

[redbandit]

Ah Cibachrome is reversal paper . It is was, bad joke.

It's possible to print through the paper. This was a practice in graphic arts, print shops. This was/is done with extraordinarily brilliant lights, huge 500W and much higher, by contact printing.

i did toss a developed sheet between the lens and the easel and there was some decent light coming through. I need better things to do with my free time. Im thinking NAP TIME

 

[mshchem]

Look up reflex copying. That will blow your mind, the old Kodak Dataguide on copying covers it.

 

[mshchem]

i did toss a developed sheet between the lens and the easel and there was some decent light coming through. I need better things to do with my free time. Im thinking NAP TIME

It's possible but you would need extended exposure and the print would be a bit fuzzy. Naps are good!

 

[mshchem]

The all black errors are another clue. This is most likely from exposure to room light.

 

[koraks]

If the print is reasonably sharp, it has NOT been exposed through the paper base. Whatever light makes it through the paper (and that's not much to begin with) will be diffused in the paper base.

A print made on paper that was upside down on the easel is extremely faint and fuzzy. Don't ask me how I know; we all do stupid things especially when just starting out

 

[redbandit]

The all black errors are another clue. This is most likely from exposure to room light.

i have my regular lights off, only use an AP orange light thats about 6 feet from the easel.. and always at least 4 feet from the paper when its open.


i HAVE killed paper in the past by opening it in bad light conditions so i learned.

Never expect the plastic sleeve to be good protection if you stick the paper in the plastic inside a normal cardboard box

 

[ic-racer]

Related but somewhat tangent to the subject; Shanghai 8x10 film will expose fine from either side. Ask me how I know....they punched marks on both corners of the film.

 

[mshchem]

If the image appears normal when focusing on the easel, and you then immediately and repeatedly get a mirror image print, this would require printing through the back of the paper.
This would be an extraordinary event, it's just almost impossible with today's RC paper. Way back, there were very lightweight papers, not RC, that were used for paper negatives, and graphic arts uses. In use these papers were used by contact printing not projection printing. Best Regards

 

[pentaxuser]

So we(including me ) are all puzzled like the OP when none of our suggestions about what the fault appears to be applicable is

In my early days( so early that I was still attending a darkroom nightschool) I printed a street scene which included my dog I knew the scene and something felt wrong about the direction the dog was walking in but I couldn't be sure. Fortunately for me there were cars passing the dog at the time and their registration plate numbers were a mirror reflection i.e they were back to front as in mirror writing

Of course if it is not this and negative was emulsion down projecting onto paper that was emulsion side up and was a fine none fuzzy print except for being a mirror of reality with the stamens bending the opposite way then here's a longshot. Was it paper from those dudes at Mobberley. Not sure you can trust those limeys

pentaxuser

 

[snusmumriken]

Never expect the plastic sleeve to be good protection if you stick the paper in the plastic inside a normal cardboard box

I keep (Ilford) paper in its black plastic bag in the cardboard box it came in, in a drawer under the enlarger. However this is both belt and braces. When I cut a sheet up for test strips, I keep the strips in a spare black plastic bag beside the enlarger, with the end folded over once. Never had any fogging issues with any of it.

 

[redbandit]

So we(including me ) are all puzzled like the OP when none of our suggestions about what the fault appears to be applicable is

In my early days( so early that I was still attending a darkroom nightschool) I printed a street scene which included my dog I knew the scene and something felt wrong about the direction the dog was walking in but I couldn't be sure. Fortunately for me there were cars passing the dog at the time and their registration plate numbers were a mirror reflection i.e they were back to front as in mirror writing

Of course if it is not this and negative was emulsion down projecting onto paper that was emulsion side up and was a fine none fuzzy print except for being a mirror of reality with the stamens bending the opposite way then here's a longshot. Was it paper from those dudes at Mobberley. Not sure you can trust those limeys

pentaxuser

i do what the older books say, same process every time for loading the carrier.

1. open carrier and lay on the table. Making sure the nice raised ring is on the bottom.
2. pick up negative strip and hold to light. Make sure i can read the brand name correctly like a magazine cover
3. ROTATE the text so that it is on the bottom
4. place into carrier
5. close up carrier and put into enlarger

That way i see the image as it is on the negative. It doesnt matter if i do it or not as to how im getting mirror images. Its just easier to focus when the bird in the projected image is standing on its feet.

 

[rcphoto]

Are you using a matte paper?

 

[FotoD]

Maybe you forgot to wear your glasses when you put the neg in the carrier?

https://schenkspass-shop.de/The-inverted-spectacles

Sorry, that's all I can think of.

 

[redbandit]

Are you using a matte paper?

arista semi matte, and it doesnt take finger prints

 

[rcphoto]

arista semi matte, and it doesnt take finger prints

Are your exposure times really long? It honestly sounds like you are exposing the non emulsion side.