new photo paper in the mix, galaxy direct positive

adelorenzo · Jul 22, 2015

They just cleared up with an update that this requires reversal processing and have promised to provide more detail soon. I'm not interested in doing that so I canceled but I do wish them well with their product.

removed account4 · Jul 22, 2015

i just got the email that the kickstarter is live too, i will put a few dollars into it,
i made the mistake thinking it was direct positive but after emailing back and forth with
the folks putting it together, i learned it is a reversal process but with more eco friendly
chemicals than sulfuric acid and dichromate bleach ( or so it seems ) ... i hope they get the funding
it's great to see lots of mom and pops filling in gaps !

pdeeh · Jul 22, 2015

jnanian said:
a reversal process but with more eco friendly
chemicals than sulfuric acid and dichromate bleach ( or so it seems ) ... !

Hmm ... Well, all the common silver bleaches are well known, and none of them are anything you want to sprinkle on your salad, so it'll be interesting to see what they intend to provide ...

removed account4 · Jul 22, 2015

pdeeh said:
Hmm ... Well, all the common silver bleaches are well known, and none of them are anything you want to sprinkle on your salad, so it'll be interesting to see what they intend to provide ...

yup!

ciniframe · Jul 22, 2015

Well, $6K at 84 backers. I figure they will need 600~800 backers total to get to $30K. It has slowed down but we'll see what the next two weeks bring. The $20 reward is the most popular and I selected that originally but switched to the $50 one for 25 sheets of 8X10 that can be cut up for both my 4X5 and 2X3 filmholders. Better economy that way although they have limited it to only 50 backers.

GalaxyPhoto · Jul 22, 2015

Hello, everyone!
Thank you all for your interest in our project! We really appreicate it!

It definitely can take green and even yellow or pretty much anything up to 600 nanometer with some limitations because even film doesnt work very well with green.

Our paper can be processed with any classic REVERSAL TECHNIQUE which has been well-known for many years. We are trying to adjust and improve it, but formulas are not a secret. Components can be easily acquired in any store that sells black & white photographic processing chemistry.
However, the combination of the chemicals in our kits will represent the result of long experiments and research that was intended to get the best of our paper. So if you want to get great results right away, feel free to get our kit, but if you have more of a mad scientist mindset you are more than welcome to experiment with the chemistry.
Also, every pack of photo paper that we sell through Kickstarter comes with detailed instructions on how to process it.

We will continue production of this photo paper. The statement that youre quoting came from a very first stage of product development. We have no doubts that everything is going to be ok.

This is not Cibachrome process if that what you are asking. However, this is Direct Positive Paper in a sense how Kodak in 1946 was describing it. Our paper can be processed with any classic REVERSAL TECHNIQUE which has been well-known for many years. We can ship chemistry to foreign countries except bleach components. So if you cant find a local supplier for everything else у can ship it to you.

pdeeh · Jul 23, 2015

But it is NOT a direct positive paper. And you do yourselves no service by insisting on calling it that.

I also think you're ill-advised to come to a site like APUG (the home of technical orthodoxy, with a dozen or more members with decades of experience in film and paper production each) and use phrases like "mad scientists".

Don't get me wrong, btw, bringing a new film photography product to the world is a good thing, and though yours isn't of personal interest to me at the moment, I do wish you success.

BUT ... You've got a chance to appeal to your core target investors here, and you're blowing it.

Roger Cole · Jul 23, 2015

Personally I'd be complimented, not offended, to be called a "mad scientist" in darkroom work, for home brewing chemistry or whatever.

But I agree that it's not a direct positive paper, but rather a paper optimized for reversal processing. How you put that into a marketing-suitable shorter form though is beyond me.

pdeeh · Jul 23, 2015

It's not that I think anyone will be offended, but that it might make them (galaxy) appear foolish and ill-informed in the eyes of so many people (and not just the PEs) here who are extremely knowledgeable and technically aware.

So the risk is not giving offence, but not being taken seriously.

David A. Goldfarb · Jul 23, 2015

Threads merged.

AgX · Jul 23, 2015

To be fair:

Here are its features: Adjusted reversal process.

From page 1 of the Galaxy site "What we want to make."

GalaxyPhoto said:
However, this is Direct Positive Paper in a sense how Kodak in 1946 was describing it.

NOT to my understanding! Direct Positive is a one-step process to me.
(Please do not call me Mad Scientist, but rather Confused Professor...)

I admit though that the term "Direct" has been used differently in the past by manufacturers.
But this should be known by any manufacturer of today and thus the character of a material stated clearly or misunderstandings by future customers corrected.

ciniframe · Jul 23, 2015

If this was truly direct positive paper I would be less interested in it. For my use it is it's higher speed that holds allure for me. I intend to use regular paper developer and to process it as a negative which I feel will be more versatile to work with. If, processed as a negative. it can be exposed at ISO 64 in daylight, then I'll be happy. As mentioned, I'd be happy to hear Photo Engineer's thoughts on all this.

GalaxyPhoto · Jul 23, 2015

Dear colleagues,
First of all, thank you so much for your input! We really appreciate any kind of feedback.

The primary use of this paper is the direct media for large format and pinhole cameras. We will cut the paper exactly to the sizes that fit nicely in those holders.

We will be able to answer the question about punching the speed so high and compromises once we have final product on our hands and figure out all the specs.

Regarding the question about the chemicals, you are right, you cannot eliminate sulfuric acid from the bleach, you only can adjust a concentration. Second component could be potassium bichromate or less active substitutes which we are playing with right now in order to make it more “salad friendly» ))))

If we have offended anyone with our “mad scientist” remark, we are truly sorry about that.
It was a joke intended to be a compliment. For us mad scientist is someone like Dr Emmett Brown from “Back to the future” who is brilliant. We are considering ourselves “mad scientists” as well, because we are always trying to invent something new. We do believe that the APUG community is one of the most respectful and resourceful, and all members are professionals with unmatchable photography experience. Again if it was offensive for anyone in any way we would deeply apologize. Galaxy appreciates and respects every supporter and every enthusiast still using traditional photography techniques.

TheToadMen · Jul 24, 2015

GalaxyPhoto said:
If we have offended anyone with our “mad scientist” remark, we are truly sorry about that.
It was a joke intended to be a compliment. For us mad scientist is someone like Dr Emmett Brown from “Back to the future” who is brilliant. We are considering ourselves “mad scientists” as well, because we are always trying to invent something new. We do believe that the APUG community is one of the most respectful and resourceful, and all members are professionals with unmatchable photography experience. Again if it was offensive for anyone in any way we would deeply apologize. Galaxy appreciates and respects every supporter and every enthusiast still using traditional photography techniques.

I consider myself a "mad scientist" - and proud of it

removed account4 · Jul 24, 2015

pdeeh said:
But it is NOT a direct positive paper. And you do yourselves no service by insisting on calling it that.

I also think you're ill-advised to come to a site like APUG (the home of technical orthodoxy, with a dozen or more members with decades of experience in film and paper production each) and use phrases like "mad scientists".

Don't get me wrong, btw, bringing a new film photography product to the world is a good thing, and though yours isn't of personal interest to me at the moment, I do wish you success.

BUT ... You've got a chance to appeal to your core target investors here, and you're blowing it.

naaah mad scientist is fine ..

Kevin Harding · Jul 24, 2015

Is this just Slavich's photobooth paper cut larger?

pdeeh · Jul 24, 2015

That's a good question

GalaxyPhoto · Jul 24, 2015

Kevin Harding said:
Is this just Slavich's photobooth paper cut larger?

Hello Kevin,
No, it's not. We want to do a paper with even higher speed and better dynamic range.
And our paper is not intended for straight-for-flash photography.

ciniframe · Aug 11, 2015

Galaxy just posted an update on their KS page.

Gadfly_71 · Aug 11, 2015

ciniframe said:
Galaxy just posted an update on their KS page.

Which you can't read unless you've backed the project. Of course without knowing exactly what the processing requirements will be and what chemicals they're including in their kits there's not a chance in hell I'm willing to get behind the product. Especially since they continue to refer to the product as "direct positive", which it most certainly is not.

As an aside, they're in the doghouse at a "shall remain nameless" forum. So far I'm not impressed with the group or the product.

pdeeh · Aug 12, 2015

Gadfly_71 said:
As an aside, they're in the doghouse at a "shall remain nameless" forum. So far I'm not impressed with the group or the product.

No need to be coy about it

I don't think it breaks APUG T&Cs to mention that Galaxy have been banned from LFPF; although the reason has not been given, it is presumably because they have broken forum T&Cs over there.

I'm not being "gossipy" in this, because I think it is information relevant to making a judgement about how confident one wants to be about Galaxy's credibility.

removed account4 · Aug 12, 2015

Gadfly_71 said:
Especially since they continue to refer to the product as "direct positive", which it most certainly is not.

from what i understand it is a direct positive / reversal paper+chemistry that is high speed.
and from what i also understand direct positive is a general term that over the years
has meant paper with chemistry that reverses and provides a positive image.
ferrotypes ( silver gelatin ) on metal and paper have been called direct postives and tintypes ...
post card / street photographers have had a long history of shooting on direct positive paper
...whether it is direct positive that uses a regular print developer or a special developer not sure what the difference is ( or why it matters ),
the galaxy paper is supposed to bypass being a negative and become a positive ... seems like a direct postive to me.

i hope they get the funding they need because it seems like it will be a fun paper to use.
thats me though, i'd rather shoot paper than film, and im getting tired of making SG prints in the dark,
so a paper that bypasses the negative-stage and is a singular object sounds great to me...

YMMV

pdeeh · Aug 12, 2015

John, it's no more a direct positive paper than any other paper.
If we're going to call the galaxy stuff direct positive then shouldn.t we be calling every other paper direct positive ? :confused:
I know you've Been experimenting
With paper reversals, and this paper will require exactly the same processing as you've been trying

Ian Grant · Aug 12, 2015

Direct positive materials develop to a positive without going through a negative stage.

The new Galaxy paper is processed first as a negative then continues through the rest of the reversal process so is an indirect positive. Galaxy are actually breaking the law by calling their material Direct Positive as they are misleading investors and potential purchasers, in the UK it's the Trade Description Act and there's similar laws in other countries.

One problem is the number of steps in the process, so while the Harman Direct Positive paper is a good teaching resource particularly with the Harman Pinhole cameras, the Galaxy process is more toxic, the current Slavich reversal process uses Potassium Bichromate and Sulphuric acid, reversal is done with Sodium Sulphide, or Thiourea & Potassium Hydroxide. The first developer is also a very high pH using 40g/litre Sodium Hydroxide to keep processing short. The overall process means it's a more limited market as it's to toxic for schools etc.

While a fast Paper would be great, the more complicated reversal process means there's less advantage over using a conventionally processed negative and contact printing.

I like Ralph Lambrecht's idea of a Monobath for the Harman Direct Positive paper, this would be very practical and I know it could be done. I spent some time working on Monobaths in the late 1970's and they work well with papers particularly when they are fine tuned for a specific type.

Ian

removed account4 · Aug 12, 2015

ian and pdeeh
thanks for the clarifications !
i didn't realize there was that much of a difference between
direct positive and reversal, i thought ( wrongly ! ) that
it was more similar than dissimilar.
john

new photo paper in the mix, galaxy direct positive

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency