Making a negative print with paper second negative

[tkamiya]

I am going to print my negative image as a negative. I'm looking for some ideas from people with experience.

The way I'm thinking of doing this is to first print my negative image (on film) onto a paper. My neg will be "flipped" so the image on this first print (positive) will be wrong way. I'm thinking using #1 or #0 grade filter for this first print. Then, I'm going to sandwich this print onto another paper emulsion side to emulsion side, then expose with say #3 grade filter.

A couple of questions.
Are my filter choices right? I kind of got an idea from a note from Ilford for the first exposure. I'm only guessing on second.
For the paper negative/positive, I'm going to use an RC. I only have pearl surface. Should this be glossy?
Are there any other way of doing this that doesn't involve paper negative? I am aware of Harmon direct positive paper but these are awfully expensive. Anything else?
Can someone guesstimate the second exposure? I know it will be long. How much more in stops compared to the first?

Thanks.

 

[markbarendt]

Sounds fun, don't know.

 

[tkamiya]

I was going to "just do it" but started to think a bit to get a bearing.

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

You can easily do this with ortho litho film if you need to go the contact print method. In my class I taught today we contacted printed cyanotypes with images created on ortholitho film in the darkroom. It was the end of the box of Arista branded litho film, and I have just ordered a box of 100 8x10 sheets from photo warehouse (ultrafine film brand) for about $85 plus shipping (ps its cheaper to order off their amazon store as shipping is only $5 instead of the $8 they are charging on their own site, plus you can use your amazon account).

If you dont need to contact print it just take a picture (copy) of your negative on negative film so you get a positive, and print with that.

Your paper to paper method also works well, but its not always the sharpest way. Always emulsion to emulsion, and use a good large piece of glass/plexi glass

 

[jeffreyg]

I haven't made a paper negative in many years but you do need single weight paper. You probably will need to make the negative on the contrasty side and will need to have ample light so a #3 filter will most likely call for a long exposure. consider the #3 to make the negative and not using a filter for the contact print. The film suggestion is easier.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Whiteymorange]

You don't mention what format you're using, but I had good experience making a positive transparency (which will print negative) by placing the original neg and a new sheet of film in a film holder together– emulsion to emulsion. I then used a shutter without a lens and exposed the film by shooting the surface of a light table––no resolved image to mess up the copy. Once I worked out the exposure it gave me very good results.

 

[tkamiya]

You don't mention what format you're using, but I had good experience making a positive transparency (which will print negative) by placing the original neg and a new sheet of film in a film holder together– emulsion to emulsion. I then used a shutter without a lens and exposed the film by shooting the surface of a light table––no resolved image to mess up the copy. Once I worked out the exposure it gave me very good results.

This is a brilliant idea. Thank you.

It's 35mm.

 

[Bill Burk]

Maybe you can put oil on a paper negative to make it more translucent? I tried on a test strip and a greased spot measured two stops (0.6) less density than the dry print.

 

[tkamiya]

I have no idea if this will work well enough but I just put a neg on a light table and took photograph of it using a macro lens. I should know in few days when I dev the film.

The trick with this is that this original neg is scratched. I used "no-scratch" but I am not sure if this method will work for duplication like this.

I'll report back when I have the result.

 

[tkamiya]

By the way, Ilford direct positive was the first method I thought of. I'm trying to do this with what I already have.... It'll be an experiment for sure.

 

[tkamiya]

Here's what happened.

I placed my original negative on a light table and used a 35mm camera with a 105mm macro lens on a tripod to take a photograph of the image. It actually worked except the contrast was little low on the duplicated negative/positive(whatever). White wasn't as white and black didn't get as black, so the dynamic range was much narrower.

I was able to bump up the contrast filter by one grade on printing and compensate. The result was very pleasing. The print is drying right now.

Thanks everyone for their ideas and recommendations. I never went the paper negative route.

 

[tkamiya]

Here's the image.

http://www.apug.org/gallery1/showimage.php?i=68190&catid=member&imageuser=36046