paper negs in smaler sizes

[himself]

mornin'

I'm thinking of trying some paper negatives for a project I have in mind, but would only be able to use 6x9 - so I was wondering if paper negatives are worth it at this size, or is it only really good for larger sizes.

I was also thinking of using the direct positive paper, so anyone with any experience of them think it's worth using them in a smaller set up (I realise there are already threads on the D+ paper, but figured I could cut my travel time somewhat, but I'll be reading them too).

The reason I'd like to try paper negs is a little about cost but also I like the idea of d+ paper being a one off image, so any other suggestions along those lines would be appreciated.

Maybe I should just build another camera, a bigger one, yes.

thanks.

 

[Jim Noel]

There is no limit to size, large or small, for paper negatives. If you want to try it, do so.

 

[himself]

but from what I've read they have really high contrast, so would that - on such a small image area - mean a loss of detail... mostly I mean on direct positive paper I guess

 

[kerne]

I've used Harmon DPP cut to 6x6 to fit a sheet film holder in my Mamiyaflex. I've gotten good results pre-flashing. On my Beseler 23CII with Nikkor 50mm lens, they get a pre-flash for 7 seconds at f16. Then metered at ISO 1.6. Sorry, don't have any scans to post.

 

[andy_k]

i'm going to crosspost what i put in the "Paper Negative Reversal Process" thread (the most recent reply) about my experiments with small reversal paper negatives:

This thread inspired me a little to try making reversal photographs straight out of the camera.
However, my approach has been to employ the Sabbatier effect onto a contrasty and medium dense paper negative.
This results in a positive with a good range of tones and fair crispness, but it definitely constrains overall contrast.

I definitely haven't mastered this technique at all, but I have made a few nice looking images fooling around.
This is a self portrait that I reversed, scanned, and photoshopped a little to improve the contrast range for better computer screen viewing.
I have attained fairly normal (say a 4 stop range) level of contrast on more recent experiments, but the pictures themselves don't look as nice.

This was on some highly expired Ilfospeed Grade 3 RC, in 6x6 format. I find better results come using full strength developer, and a flash to reverse the negative.

if you follow the link (or find the post) i attached a scan of a self portrait i made.

 

[Joe VanCleave]

I've used the Harman DPP in a Bronica ETRS, cut down to 6x4.5cm size, preflashed, similar to Kerne's experience. Good results, especially given the electronic shutter on the ETRS goes up to 2 seconds, much more accurate at these speeds than a mechanical shutter on an LF.

The kinds of subject matter that work well in these small sizes are portraits and still lifes where the principle subject matter is predominately one central object.

I like to use indirect north-facing daylight for the Harman paper, metered using a handheld meter at ISO1.6.

~Joe

 

[himself]

thanks everyone, 'twas just the good news I was hoping for.

if any of you do have any scans in future post 'em so we can have a look.
anyone tried without pre-flashing?

 

[mhcfires]

This gives me food for thought. I can load a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 grafmatic changer with six sheets of paper and use either my Series B Graflex or my baby Speed. Sounds like a good project for the coming week.