Let's All Print (or Maybe Scan) One Negative 2025

Don_ih said:

That's much larger than I did. All my prints are 5x7 except the one 11x14 I did as a test. Even making an 11x14 is a chore for me.

Click to expand...

I only meant to point out that the negative was good enough for that much enlargement and probably more. Nice and sharp, and no spotting required. For this thread, size is otherwise irrelevant.

I started with the scanned negative named PNX2509_SDIV_3200dpi, and here's what I did to it:

I didn't crop it.
Darkened the image because it looked over/under exposed.
Straightened it by pulling down the lower right corner a bit. That made the horizon line perfectly level, (at least for the image I started with.)
Removed various scratches and dust specks from the scanning process of the original negative.
Fixed some dark patches either introduced during the developing process or shadows from the rising sun.
Removed a distracting highline wire from the top left area.
Cloned over other distracting elements such as some patches in the grass, etc.
Gave it some minor sharpening.
And I especialoly enjoyed the Mercury Cougar XR-7 positioned in front.

I didn't crop the image because of the way I work when I'm shooting. What I frame in the viewfinder is what I want in my final image to be, and I assume other people work that way as well. That's why I left the image uncropped because that's the way it was originally framed by Don_ih. I wanted to respect his vision.

Looking at everybody else's submissions gave me lots of great ideas. I never would have thought to do things like that.

mcfitz said:

Scan from a darkroom print, on Ilford MGRC Satin, 18x24cm. Developper is Adox MCC, dilution 1:4.

The sign above the building: USED AUTO PARTS was the inspiration.

The print is multiple exposures on the same sheet of paper, the negative first under-exposed so that a ghost image of the slightly cropped negative formed the base for the rest.

That sheet was put in the paper safe while I got on with the next part of the printing process.

The head of the enlarger was raised and refocused before returning the sheet of pre-exposed paper.

It was swivelled 180°, so upside down relative to the first exposure.

The easel was then shifted around under the enlarger head, with areas dodged while exposing areas that interested me.

I wanted to fill the spaces that were empty, and move those vehicles around in space.

Four separate areas were exposed this way, et voilà le résultat.

This is a very simplified description of two separate days in the darkroom and of all the trial and error that went on!

Four prints were done this way, each one different, and unique.

None can be duplicated, at least in a darkroom.
It's not simple to describe what my mental process was, that took me from a straight work print of the negative to the final print.
It was a matter of facing the complexity of a rather dense negative, an image with strong graphic elements in the central horizontal area, and empty space in the sky and textured space on the grassy foreground. The more I looked at all the details in the store front, the cars, etc, the more fascinating those became. A form of mosaic seemed most appealing to me, but not as a collage compiled from the work prints and test strips. Rather, a mosaic formed under the enlarger lens. Which is what I ended up with, and am quite happy with it.

This was my soundtrack to the project, and it suits the image, I think.

Click to expand...

Thanks for responding to my post and to others who have described their thought processes. Very impressive printmakingYour print reminded me of photographers in the 1920's and 30's who would make prints fo patterns to try to sell to fabric designers. This would be a fabulous bed sheet set or curtain design or a beer can design
really! Submit art here
When the negative arrived I first made a 8x10 work print to assess where to go. I confess I was nonplussed and did not quite know what to make of it. I mainly do portraiture, where the subject is usually plainly obvious and other elements of the composition are designed to enhance the subject. What was the subject here? How did the composition aid and direct attention to the subject? I was handicapped by being one of the 0.125% of North American males that have no interest in automobiles.

But I was impressed with the sharpness of the negative and thought the development and exposure made an easy to print negative. So I sat on it for a while and tried various crops with L-shaped cards. I thought perhaps a solarisation type treatment might be interesting. I was unable to make that happen but I did in actuality end up flashing the print which darkened the sky and help in the separation of tones Vis a Vis the rooftop car. The rooftop car presented itself to me as a subject and I decided to try some older Ilford Art paper for its texture, tone, and feel. The out of date paper had fogged and also separated the high values. I went from a 20 sec exposure for the work print to a 4 minute exposure for this. The end result demonstrates the nature of photography as an isolation of elements; removing and removing until the subject reveals itself. This is my end result which I mailed to Don because I thought he should be able to experience the physical nature of the print (he has done such excellent work)! Click on it to see.