Is there a way to shoot a paper negative at ISO 100?

[mkillmer]

Is there a way to shoot a paper negative at ISO 100? I know, "Use Film" - not the answer I need though...
I am working on a project where I need to use photo paper. I'm not restricting myself to commercial papers for this project (although that would be ideal).
I will consider a special order or using an emulsion, but I dont know where to start.
It has been suggested that "Ultrafine" papers are ISO 12, and some Kodak papers are higher again.
Any ideas?

 

[maarten m]

why you need to shoot at 100iso?

 

[removed account4]

some papers are native iso of 50.

if you don't mind experimenting, you might be able to speed up your paper
by fuming it in a peroxide box .
it boosts the iso of film, so who knows what it might do for paper

i have asked people about doing it with paper and no one responded,
but people have been doing it with film for a long long time ...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)


good luck !
john

 

[mkillmer]

Hi John - do you know what papers might be at 50 ISO?

 

[polyglot]

Kentmere is pretty fast but not that fast.

You can buy liquid emulsions. I don't know how fast they are but if you're into chemistry, you can add sensitising dyes (go read the "emulsion making" threads, I've no idea of what's required or whether it's possible to boost sensitivity on a commercial emulsion or whether you need to start from scratch) that will improve speed and spectral sensitivity.

You could gain a little additional speed by preflashing to get the image off the toe of the paper. The paper-neg will look greyer and your available dynamic range will be reduced but assuming you're going to contact-print the paper neg onto another paper to get a positive, that should help the original-capture speed.

 

[removed account4]

Hi John - do you know what papers might be at 50 ISO?

hey there

i was a little bit off, sorry, its iso 25, and its ilford ... still better than iso 6

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)


john

 

[Jeff Searust]

Why do you need paper at iso100?

 

[piu58]

> Kentmere is pretty fast but not that fast.

It is the fastest paper I know.

> You could gain a little additional speed by preflashing

Two stops are possible this way, but not much more.

 

[polyglot]

According to PE in that other thread, the Ilford is "about 25" but it will depend of course on the spectrum present in the scene. In my experience, Kentmere VC Select (and Fineprint FB) is about 1 stop faster than Ilford, so you probably get ISO50. Not sure if PE's testing involved preflashing but if it didn't, you might reach ISO100. Maybe. Note that there are a whole bunch of others in that thread saying "no, it's between 3 and 10".

Why don't you try it out with some bracketing?

 

[removed account4]

papers vary depending on the paper and the light.
graded papers i have used are very slow
gaslight papers, very slow
bottled emulsions, some are slow, some were fst ( luminos was about asa 100 )

i wish i had peroxide and a box, i'd fume my paper and see what happens, since it
has been known to work with film, it seems like a good bet to work with paper.

 

[johnielvis]

there is super speed paper used in photo booths---the photo booth people will sell you a roll but it's teeny tiny and they won't tell me where they get if from so I can't talk to the manufacturer to try to get it in sheets.

fastest paper I used is COLOR paper--full spectrum too--however it doesn't get dark enough. I haven't yet experimented with intensifying it, that will by next.

black and white papers have very little contrast range and are very very difficult to expose...they are touchier than the touchiest slide film and are very slow. You can flash it to tame the contrast a bit and to increase the speed..look into "flashing" the paper--tons of techniquest discussed here and elsewhere to give you instant success. no way you're going to get iso 50 or even 25....forget that...that's what film emulsions are for

 

[removed account4]

no way you're going to get iso 50 or even 25....forget that...that's what film emulsions are for

PE just sticks ilford paper in his film holder, exposes it at iso 25 every time he uses it,
and illumiquest rated ilford paper at iso 25 in his afghan box camera when he took it on the street
without any special technique of increasing the speed. ( you can see his results in his apug gallery )

15 years ago i tested the speed of every paper i had in my darkroom, 15+ varieties of
rc and fb papers ( graded + rc ). i exposed and tested them all in the same conditions and they varied wildly
from less than asa 1 to around 12 ... i tended to look for a dense negative rather than a good one
because i never really shot paper negatives, and was clueless when i did the test ... probably my tests
would have rated my ilford at asa 25 too ... but i didn't know any better

nothing special, just a skylight, a coffee cup a camera and some paper
and a tray full of gaf universal developer ( sister of ansco 130 )

 

[MartinP]

I used an EI of 6 with MGIV in a pinhole camera, but there were so many other variables that I never nailed down an exact figure.

Perhaps it would also be helpful to know what you are trying to achieve, then maybe some sort of workaround can be collectively arrived at?!

 

[mkillmer]

Thanks everyone for your inputs. I'm trying to work out a way to take large format indoor portraits with passive lighting and then probably contact print them.
I want to avoid a lighting set up, so no flashes. I like the look of photo paper, so hoping to use that (5x7).
My problem is getting the models to hold still. I'm hoping to solve the problem be increasing the sensitivity of the paper (through developer) or use a faster speed paper.
jnanian mentioned a 100 ISO emulsion called "luminos" - I'll look into that.
My own experiance with Ilford paper is that it is about ISO 5, but maybe better development will get me to PE and jnanian's ISO 25.
I'm still working on this and will report back my status!

 

[semeuse]

I have used paper negatives for indoor portraits with an 8x10 Ansco camera fitted with a somewhat fast homemade lens (about f6 or so). I'd guess the ISO somewhere around 6 or 10 - single weight Slavich paper. No flash, but TONS of light to be able to use my cap as the shutter - I seem to remember something like 2 250 watt and 1 500 watt hot lights fairly close to the subject in a bright room. What did I do with those prints? They're in one of those boxes in there...

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

If you're looking for an orthochromatic look, try xray film. I've heard that it's about ASA 100-200. I bought some to test, but haven't gotten around to testing yet. It's also dirt cheap and you can process it like BW photo paper under a safelight.

 

[removed account4]

jnanian mentioned a 100 ISO emulsion called "luminos" - I'll look into that.

sorry to report this
but it hasn't been made in a long long time ...

 

[Tom1956]

If you're looking for an orthochromatic look, try xray film. I've heard that it's about ASA 100-200. I bought some to test, but haven't gotten around to testing yet. It's also dirt cheap and you can process it like BW photo paper under a safelight.

Pulling up an older thread, as I have begun to jump into 8x10. I don't have the funding to buy new film, so will be shooting with paper negatives for a while. But about this X-Ray film Maincoon--I thought I had studied the matter and made the determination that X-Ray film was blue-sensitive, and paper was mildly orthochromatic. But I've done so much of this internet research, I can't figure what's what any more. More discussion on the matter would be welcome.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I managed to shoot and process some Fuji HRT. I rate it at ASA 200 souped in Dektol. It's green sensitive. It's about $45 for 100 sheets 8x10. I've been making salt prints with the negs.

 

[Tom1956]

OK, green, which qualifies it as ortho, though I might question whether it has flat response across that end of the spectrum. But possibly, enough to at least be able to use a yellow filter and get some cloud contrast (separation), maybe? I hate the idea of shooting a blue sky with big puffy clouds and getting nothing but a zone 9 out of it all.
Now, on to paper, it's obvious all I'm going to be able to buy new would be some brand of RC multigrade for the making of paper negatives. I wonder just how ortho it is, if at all.

 

[Nikola Dulgiarov]

Ortho X-ray film can be exposed through a medium yellow filter with good results, neat cloud separation and tonal range of the skin tones. I've been working solely with mammography x-ray film for my 8x10 images, and I shoot it at 100ASA, filter included, and develop in Pyrocat HD, Xtol. The Perfection XR foruma on unblinkingeye allows for a push up to 200 ASA. If you absolutely have to use paper negatives, color RA4 paper developed in a high contrast B&W developer is easily 100 ASA and is panchromatic. I haven't tried it in Pyrocat @ 1+5+100, but it may be worthwhile.

 

[Tom1956]

Ortho X-ray film can be exposed through a medium yellow filter with good results, neat cloud separation and tonal range of the skin tones. I've been working solely with mammography x-ray film for my 8x10 images, and I shoot it at 100ASA, filter included, and develop in Pyrocat HD, Xtol. The Perfection XR foruma on unblinkingeye allows for a push up to 200 ASA. If you absolutely have to use paper negatives, color RA4 paper developed in a high contrast B&W developer is easily 100 ASA and is panchromatic. I haven't tried it in Pyrocat @ 1+5+100, but it may be worthwhile.

There's the answer I've been looking for. I do have a slight wonder of any halation, due to the probability this kind of film has no anti-hation backing. As far as Pyrocat, I've never used it--know all about it, and would agree as to the advisability of it's use in this application. Although I have several packages of good D-76 laying around, sounds like the Pyrocat may be the best multi-purpose thing to use.
Sounds like a 15G filter would be as far red as you dare go, and even that would probably cause a loss of speed. Sounds like No. 8 or 11 would be as far red as ordinary circumstances woule allow with X-ray film. I can live with that. This foolishness of these 8x10 film prices is just ridiculous. I believe I'll give this a try. Thanks.

 

[Nikola Dulgiarov]

D76 should also work, you can give it a try. Ortho films are great for developing in trays, because you can work by inspection. My 100ASA Xray film is neatly insensitive to the red filter I use for photopapers. Unfortunately, with RA4 paper, you must either work in complete darkness, or under a very dim green filter, which isn't actually safe for the paper, but is below its initial exposure threshold for the handling time; such a safelight is only good enough to give you outlines and pale shadows in the DR; hence you must develop by time. Starting time would be approx 2 minutes at 20C.
As far as X-ray films and filters, I dare not say much, as I make my own gelatin coated filters, so my medium yellow is just X% tartrazine soln. in 10% gelatin, spun to a 0.06mm coating on optical glass. But the absorption graph matches a medium yellow filter, with a slight extension into the green.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I do have a slight wonder of any halation, due to the probability this kind of film has no anti-hation backing.

The film is not super sharp because it lacks an anti-halation layer, but that's fine with me. The emulsion is also soft when it's developed so handle it carefully. I like the look of the film with some subjects. Souping the film under a safelight is also a plus.

 

[Tom1956]

I wonder if the halation situation is anywhere near as bad as the 35mm High Speed Infrared (HEI135-20) I used to shoot many years ago. I recall Kodak put that on this god-awful "Estar-AH" base, whatever that was, and it would bloom like the devil. Always wondered why they did that. On X-Ray film, not having the backing is self-explanatory., as it's not an optical process and isn't sharp in the first place. But I do wonder if the blooming is bad enough to give that "dreamy, other-worldly" effect that I do not want.