I've heard that shooting paper negatives is addictive

[rknewcomb]

Why is it that shooting paper negatives is so addictive? Is it the particular image qualities, the cameras that you use for it, the process??
thanks
Robert

 

[Horatio]

Did you mean "addictive"? I hope to explore this avenue soon as paper can be cut and loaded into 4x5 film holders under a safelight. Paper has an ISO of 3 to 6, so exposures can be quite lengthy, or so I've read. Check out Eugene Atget's work for examples. I imagine it would be easier to scan with a flatbed scanner.

 

[removed account4]

Hi Robert
yes, all of what you said, its extremely addictive.
if you do things close to where you are able to develop film / paper
you have an image in like 3 mins after you shoot it . so its speed
when you process the paper, you have more control over it because you aren't
blind when you process it. its the image quality, not being panchromatic the grays are
different, the images have a different feel to them, and you have to judge light differently when you make them
because the paper has a different response to light that is different than film ... there is just something about it that
to me at least, is more rewarding than shooting film ... AND. if you like liquid emulsion you can coat your own or make your own
and then coat your own which gives it 1 step closer to handmade photography..
expired paper works great for paper negatives too, so it costs a little less than film in that respect. ...
one mode of paper negative photography I have fallen in love with is tangential / similar to what niciphore niepce was doing,
you put a sheet of paper in the camera and leave the shutter open on your lens, you get the light impression on the paper which can sometimes
be stabilized and fixed or it's ephemeral like a glimpse that you might or might not want to. or be able to make a 2nd generation image ( scan, Xerox rephotograph &c ) from


I don't think there is a 12 step program for shooting paper yet
John

 

[ciniframe]

And, if the film is no longer made for some model camera, you can often cut paper to fit the film gate for one shot operation. But the shutter needs to have a ‘B’ mode so you can expose the slow paper. That said, I have a Polaroid camera that shoots 108 and 107 pack film and has only EE exposure. With it I found you can block the meter eye and the shutter will stay open. To end the exposure unblock thr meter eye meter eye and the shutter will close.

 

[distributed]

I haven't heard that shooting paper negatives is addictive until now. But given the price difference between film and paper my first shot was practically free

It's good to see that there are a few afficionados of paper negatives here. I recently cut strips of 5x7" fixed grade paper and rolled them onto 120 spools together with backing paper. I've developed them normally in paper chemistry. Apart from some fogging (I found yet another paper for which my safelight isn't safe) the negatives look fine to the naked eye. However I suspect that by processing them like normal photo paper, I developed them to too high a contrast and that they will be nigh unprintable. I will contact print once my darkroom gets cooler again.

Using this development, my ISO was around 25 which surprised me as quite high. How are y'all processing your paper negatives? Are you using shorter processing times or more diluted developer?

To answer the original question: I can't even tell whether it's addictive. But I can tell that I was drawn to paper negatives first because I really like contact prints. Paper negatives seemed like something that would be fun to try. The process is quite experimental, which is interesting to me and will probably also appeal to some others. What is really cool is that you can work under a safelight when handling the film and that you can see the negatives develop in front of you. It takes the blindly performed mechanical procedures out of negative preparation and replaces them with the same pleasant as developing BW positives in the darkroom. Plus, turnaround times are very short. If you have a darkroom and your trays ready and close by, you can easily re-take a shot and have a result in less than 5 minutes.

 

[radiant]

Addictive because:

- it is fun
- it is cheap
- gives unpredictable results because of the spectral response
- it allows to play and experiment

And yet we didn't speak about paper positives

Selfie here on paper negative, with Zeiss Ikon Nettar 518/16 (6x6) : https://dumpor.com/c/9413040841802833622

 

[BJC0000]

What about REAL paper negatives (calotypes)?
They are fun, certainly unpredictable and you can play and experiment to your heart's content.
Not quite so sure about cheap given the price of silver nitrate?

 

[removed account4]

and then there is washi film
http://filmwashi.com/en/

 

[juan]

Or be a Luddite like me. From about 2005-2012 all my camera club friends were switching to digisnappers whilst I stuck to film. Their wives made them clean out all the old silver paper from the bottoms of their closets, and they gave the paper to me. I have about 3,000 sheets of expired 8x10 paper of various kinds to play with.

 

[Máx Arnold]

Indeed paper negatives are addictive!
The response to light is different and it remembers me of proper alternative practices. I prefer the plain emulsions to panchromatic ones, I like how the reds end up super dark!
Paper behaves very diferent than film. Its latitude is awful. You better don't mess around with contrasty subjects or hard light because it will only record one part, the rest is gonna be hideously under/ overexposed. Interestingly enough, with the proper lighting, that's not much of an issue.
I cut tiny pieces of paper and snap pictures on my Pentax 35mm camera. Every built-in lightmeter will react diferently to the paper's sensitivity. My Pentax says that my paper is 32 1/3 ASA, and I'm pretty happy with it. At f/ 2.8 I get to shoot photographs at 1/60", which is surreal considering I'm using paper. I've also used it on a pinhole camera which was f/80 and exposures never went over 10 seconds. I really don't get it when people talk about long exposures...
So yeah, paper negatives are the perfect medium for bold stuff (or maybe preliminar studies).

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Every built-in lightmeter will react diferently to the paper's sensitivity. My Pentax says that my paper is 32 1/3 ASA, and I'm pretty happy with it.

That's a whole lot more usable speed than what one gets with the venerable Adox CMS 20ii film!! Which paper do you use?

I didn't quite get you when you said "every built-in lightmeter will react diferently to the paper's sensitivity". Do you mind explaining your process for determining paper speed?

 

[Máx Arnold]

Do you mind explaining your process for determining paper speed?

I just guess what the ISO/ASA could be and take a test photograph in bright daylight, which is the best light for paper negatives. Then I process the negative and judge if it is over or underexposed, and if so I adjust the ASA setting in the camera accordingly until I get consistent exposures. It's basically trial and error.

That's a whole lot more usable speed than what one gets with the venerable Adox CMS 20ii film!! Which paper do you use?

You're right. It's quite high, and quite useful too... I use Kentmere VC select variable contrast RC paper, which I didn't know when I got it but it has quite an amount of tricks to get high sensitivity. Because it is variable contrast, it is not just sensitive to blue light, though the colors do render like in classic blue sensitive emulsions. It also has developer added into the emulsion, which kicks the ASA higher. So yeah, pretty good deal. Kentmere is a second brand from Ilford. Same stuff, lower price.

 

[removed account4]

Do you mind explaining your process for determining paper speed?

Hi Raghu
I don't mean to speak for Máx in any way shape or form but .. *I* have found it is next to impossible to determine the ISO of photo paper unless it is done using an enlarger bulb or similar type of light source rich in blue light ... it is the understanding much like film ISO is determined in a lab under specific conditions and it is just a framework for the rest of us to work with. I remember a conversation I had with the guy who founded Rockland Colloid and he used the expression "variable ISO" to describe how paper or liquid emulsion ( that is not pan chromatic ) operates. and for me .. that is what makes it so much fun, you have to really be connected with your environment ... flash or enlarger is 1 thing, UV light bank is another, natural light something else, different time of year something else, none of it relates but it all relates at the same time. open shade one day is not the same as open shade a few weeks or a month later.. and once you crack the code there is nothing like it...

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Hi Raghu
I don't mean to speak for Máx in any way shape or form but .. it is next to impossible to determine the ISO of photo paper unless it is done using an enlarger bulb or similar type of light source rich in blue light and that is the understanding much like film ISO is determined in a lab under specific conditions and it is just a framework for the rest of us to work with. I remember a conversation I had with the guy who founded Rockland Colloid and he used the expression "variable ISO" to describe how paper or liquid emulsion ( that is not pan chromatic ) operates. and for me .. that is what makes it so much fun, you have to really be connected with your environment ... flash or enlarger is 1 thing, UV light bank is another, natural light something else, different time of year something else, none of it relates but it all relates at the same time. open shade one day is not the same as open shade a few weeks or a month later.. and once you crack the code there is nothing like it...

Add reciprocity failure and it becomes very complicated!

Paper has 2 kinds of reciprocity failure, speed and contrast.

In speed reciprocity failure, the paper loses speed with exposures much above about 1 minute and it gains speed below about 1 second.

In contrast reciprocity failure, contrast goes down with longer exposure and up with shorter exposure.

These effects vary vastly among papers, but can be disastrous with VC papers where you are trying to design matched reciprocity failure between 2 emulsions.

It looks like people who're getting good speed from paper are using it at the fast speed reciprocity failure region.

 

[NB23]

The beat paper negative is fogged/expired papers. The fog/grayness will work against the excessive contrast of fresh papers.

Expired, foggy paper has been my very best piece of equipment, a best kept secret in the paper negative realm.

 

[removed account4]

Add reciprocity failure and it becomes very complicated!



It looks like people who're getting good speed from paper are using it at the fast speed reciprocity failure region.

complicated, indeed!
I never take into account reciprocity and typically just beat the exposure into the paper. for some time I was using caffenol c developer ( spiked of course ) and got fun results... lately im seeking hard contrast because I'm attempting to make peroxide reversals and I 've learned through lots of failures that reversals don't really like mostly midtone . .. fun and addictive !

 

[Máx Arnold]

Jnantz is so right. Paper will never behave the same way one time or another!
My method works for me, though I have to admit that if I want to shoot something different than open shade still lifes I have to repeat the process. I call it "taming" a photographic process when one experiments until finding a general purpose exposure time. To prove the point, earlier today I wanted to take a skyscape, and I had to estimate again the ASA, which ended up being 200 1/3 for a sky very bright and full of blue and UV light.

And yes, usually my exposures don't go down of 1/30"... That while I stick with an f/2 lens...

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

earlier today I wanted to take a skyscape, and I had to estimate again the ASA, which ended up being 200 1/3 for a sky very bright and full of blue and UV light.

Wow! That's quite an insane speed for photographic paper! Maybe I've been shooting the wrong subjects all the while and should switch to skyscape photography. Can you post some examples of your work at this speed?

 

[Máx Arnold]

Yesterday we had very beautiful clouds, so you're in luck!

You can tell I don't have burnt blacks not completely white areas, I'm very happy with the exposure...
To explain a little bit, if my go-to ASA rating would be 32 1/3, that means for properly photographing the sky (and just the sky) I have to account for 3 stops of underexposure. I have three methods: stepping down the aperture three stops, increasing the shutter speed OR estimating the ASA three stops higher. Much like when pushing or pulling film. It doesn't mean the ASA of my paper is 200, it means I'm looking for detail on the clouds, not a jet black blob of silver. I let the meter do the math and I get to do the art. And if I were to shoot something at eye level or ground level there probably would be no image at all! Some people rate their paper at ISO 3, some at 6, 12 even 0.375. Everything changes from click to click, from person to person, and that's part of the fun! The trick is finding which exposure works for everyone of us...

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

It is indeed addictive. Must be a combination of economy, shorter contrast range, and ortho sensitivity... and can process under a safelight! Same qualities as x-ray film, but still has a different look.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Yesterday we had very beautiful clouds, so you're in luck!
View attachment 284918 View attachment 284919
You can tell I don't have burnt blacks not completely white areas, I'm very happy with the exposure...
To explain a little bit,

I didn't quite understand your method but it looks like you're addicted to paper negatives and having a lot of fun making them! Kudos!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Why is it that shooting paper negatives is so addictive? Is it the particular image qualities, the cameras that you use for it, the process??
thanks
Robert

it's the fun with the process for me!

 

[Máx Arnold]

(...) and can process under a safelight!

Hell yes!

 

[Máx Arnold]

The other day I bought two rolls of 35mm color negative film. One is loaded in my camera right now. It really feels cumbersome. Too many photographs left until the roll is through, and I can't open the camera back. Plus, I discovered that shooting on color is very difficult for me... I guess I think on black and white
Paper negatives are my bread and butter... ever felt like that?