Now this is a cleaver way of enlarging a neg

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I've been want to explore alternative process for a while. The best I've done so far is to contact print 4x5 and 5x7 negs with salt prints and cyanotypes. As this article says, you risk damaging the original negs. This method is totally analog. I hate to admit this, but I bought an injet printer and planned to print on OHP film. But now, there's an easier way. I haven't tested this method. Has anybody tried this out?

http://www.thewebdarkroom.com/?p=675

 

[horacekenneth]

That is cleaver.

Couldn't you skip the last step of creating the 2nd negative and just use the RC print face down on your your alt process?

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Possibly

That is cleaver.

Couldn't you skip the last step of creating the 2nd negative and just use the RC print face down on your your alt process?

But I don't think RC prints are transparent enough and you want a negative image. But please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[horacekenneth]

I've never tried any alt processes but I do contact printing with paper negatives and it seems to be the same idea. I shoot a sheet of RC paper in my camera and then in a darkroom I put an unexposed sheet of the same face to face with the exposed sheet (exposed on top of course) and shine my enlarger down onto it for 20 seconds or so, develop and I have the positive picture.

 

[artonpaper]

I actually tried this technique a number of years ago, when it occurred to me. Someone gave me an old print and wanted a platinum print. I copied the print to 4 x 5 using polarized light, etc, and made an 8 x 10 print on RC. I then contacted that onto lith film, developed in D-76. It worked, but the negative quality is not quite what you would get direct from film. But I do not mean to discourage you from using it. I have also tried the usual method of making a film positive and then a negative, which is a LOT of work. In addition I've tried getting my film processed by DR5 into positives and then just projecting them onto Plus X. That worked very well, but, forgive me for saying so, but I'm getting great quality from inkjet negatives and while this involves some digital technology, I see it as digital in the service of analogue.

 

[lxdude]

Hmmm...I'm confused. I read the whole thing and not a cleaver in sight.


Not even a picture of Eldridge...

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I'm glad I didn't mention Beaver on the original post

 

[m1tch]

If you wanted to enlarge would it not just be easier to scan it in and get a digital negative then print on a transparent OHP sheet, that way you can choose the exact size and also tweek the contrast etc perfectly on the PC, I will be doing some cyanotype printing soon (just got some watercolour paper and getting chemicals in a couple of weeks) and I shoot on a range of formats from 35mm to 5x4, im getting a photo scanner to digitise the negatives I get anyway and printing on OTP transparancies will allow a much sharper image vs tranfering from one to the next to the next etc. I guess we will see how it works out