Kodak 3A - first attempt paper negs - looking for tips

[mr rusty]

Just acquired a nice Kodak 3A special 1913 with a carl zeiss london f6.3 tessar. This should take 122 roll film which is long obsolete, so tried some Ilford MG rated it ASA3 and this is the result of a paper negative scan reversed and tweaked slightly in software. Haven't tried contact printing yet, but it shows some promise. What am I trying to achieve - not sure! just want to see what this old camera can do.

I might try cutting down some HP5 to fit. Ilford say that a dark green safelight can be used for "brief inspections". What do people reckon "brief" means, as I have a dark green filter it might help me to see what I am doing.

edit - although this post has hybrid words in it, I am not interested in this aspect - want tips on contact printing paper negs!

 

[removed account4]

hi mr rusty
have you seen this article ?
http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/devinsp.html
it makes it seem easy, but after doing it a few times you get the hang of it

with paper negative printing i usually make them a little "thinner" than traditional film type negatives
emulsion to emulsion and do a test strip. a trick i learned from david william white is to remove the lens from
your enlarger and put your VC enlarging filters where the lens went it will help with the contrast when you print,
or you can put these filters infront of your lens when you take ( #2? ) and it will deaden the contrast a bit. have fun!
nice camera and nice photograph
i have my grandparents' autographic 3a, its a "vest camera" in a land of giants, isn't it ?

john

 

[mr rusty]

That's a great article - thanks. I'm going to experiment some more with paper negs. I have a set of below-lens filters, and I also have both a yellow and green push-on filter that fit this lens. I'm also going try a cardboard film gate so I can run some 120 through it. I could also cut down some 5x7 HP5, but that's quite expensive so will have to wait a while.

Yes, it's hardly a "pocket" camera. I've been avoiding GAS for a while, but was tempted by this because have recently acquired a load of old family prints that have turned up after a relative passed, and many are postcard format. The detail in what are obviously contact prints is superb. Significant other hasn't spotted this camera yet - most of my others are all similar sized, so they "all look the same". Think this one stands out a bit..................

simon

 

[tedr1]

I think brief inspections are measured in seconds, but you can check with Ilford, email them the question, technical@harmantechnology.com

Film negatives have lower contrast than the subject. Paper has higher contrast than the subject. Prints from paper negs are more contrasty than from film negs, try using lower contrast paper grade when printing, there will be less empty blacks and empty whites.

 

[NedL]

Mr. Rusty,

I like to use 5x7 paper cut to 3.75x7. The extra width helps hold the paper in place when you close the back. 122 is a great size for contact printing.
It's not hard to set up a system for swapping paper in a changing bag.

For contact printing onto normal photo paper ( not alt process ), it can be helpful to reduce the contrast in the paper negative. There are several ways to go about this: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) is good and will also increase the speed by around 1 stop, I like to use VC paper and a yellow filter. Joe VanCleave, who is a master of paper negatives, prefers graded paper. Once you've got the hang of what a negative that prints well looks like, you can try overexposing just a little ( 1/2 to 1 stop is a good starting point ) and using dilute developer. ( Dektol 1:8, maybe slightly used, is a good starting point even if you don't overexpose ) I used to save my dektol from printing sessions to use with paper negatives and keep it up to a week or two, beyond when it would be useful for making prints. These days I use LPD at the same strength that I use for printing.

With the papers I've tried ( adorama brand VC and Ilford MGIV ), I get approximately:

ISO 6 untreated for contrasty negatives good for salt printing.
ISO 12 pre-flashed
ISO 3 pre-flashed holding a yellow filter in front of the lens.

You'll learn to adjust for time of day and the amount of blue light...

So there will be two ranges of shutter speeds that are useful. If it is bright enough, you can open up the lens and use the shutter. On a tripod of course, I've used up to 5 shutter releases to build up enough exposure. I usually figure if I can make the exposure with less than about 1/6th second with an available aperture, this can be a good approach. The other option is to stop way down, use bulb mode, and make a longer exposure. I figure if the exposure can be over about 3/4 second, this can work. Exposures between 1/6 and 3/4 of a second are not convenient ( too quick to judge w/ B mode, and too long for the available shutter speeds ), but this is easy enough to work around. There is no situation where one or the other approaches will not work.

Paper is less forgiving than film in terms of exposure. You will capture about 2 stops of information on either side of your chosen exposure, 2.5 in the best circumstances and I usually only envision 1.5. Often you will need to decide which side to lose. It is nearly impossible to capture good detail in bright clouds and have more than a silhouette foreground, so usually you will let the sky go white and expose for your subject. This makes wonderful, atmospheric old-fashioned looking prints, reminiscent of photos from the turn of the century.

Have fun!

 

[mr rusty]

Well, I made up a mask and a couple of reels to take 120 and this is the result on some PanF. have to say I am impressed. Not bad for a camera from 1913

This is at a local agricultural show - the tractor pull track. neg scan (my scanner crops some of the top and bottom on 120) and an excerpt of the centre banner

 

[NedL]

Very cool!

 

[pgomena]

You're off to a great start! I've been using paper in pinhole cameras lately. I found a small piece of 00 Multigrade filter behind the pinhole helps control contrast to some extent.

 

[paul_c5x4]

Just acquired a nice Kodak 3A special 1913 with a carl zeiss london f6.3 tessar. This should take 122 roll film which is long obsolete,

Although the 122 format may be obsolete, there are still stocks of the film available. I've got a couple of rolls of what I believe are 122 sitting in the fridge....

 

[MartinP]

Note that the 'inspection' idea applies to exposed and almost-completely developed film -- it's sensitivity to light is hugely reduced by that stage, and a few (very few) seconds is survivable for the image. You cannot use the same light with unexposed and undeveloped film. I assume that you meant to use the 'inspection'-light idea to arrange the negative in the back of the camera of course. An infra-red goggles system would be ideal, though possibly hard to find or adapt at a sensible price?

Using paper negatives, note that Kentmere paper is about a stop quicker than Ilford branded material. For a paper neg, choose the matte surface, to reduce reflections and it would also be worth trying pre-flashing the paper-neg to reduce contrast. It is unfortunate that 4x5" sheet film is just a little bit short, though I suppose you could make up card masks for each end of the gate.

 

[NedL]

... It is unfortunate that 4x5" sheet film is just a little bit short, though I suppose you could make up card masks for each end of the gate.

Yes, I made a black card mask and it worked quite well. You still have to trim off a hair more than 1/4" from a sheet of 4x5 film. Between trimming the film in the dark, fiddling with getting it into my black card mask in the dark, losing the great 122 aspect ratio, and finding that my enlarger can't reach the corners, I gave up on it. It would have been better if I'd bought 5x7 film for cutting down and contact printing. I might have felt differently if I had a 4x5 enlarger!