Printing old Kodak Lantern Slides on Harman Direct Positive - Advice?

[Lee Birder]

Hello all,
I'm wondering if anyone has advice for making prints from old positive slides (I have many boxes of my great-great-grandfather's Kodak Lantern slides) in the darkroom. From the little research I have done, it seems that Harman's Direct Positive paper will be my best bet. I have read a little, here on APUG and elsewhere, about 'pre-flashing' techniques to control contrast but I'm hoping that somebody here may be willing to share their personal experiences printing from slides or from Harman's paper.
Thanks very much for your help!

 

[Nodda Duma]

The samples you posted are very cool!

What if you did contact prints onto sheet film? Then just enlarge those onto regular paper? I would think cost would be a wash or slightly better than Harman Direct?

 

[pdeeh]

I think the contact to film route offers lots more flexibility for the final prints.
Plus, harman dp ain't cheap and I would have thought a pack of arista ortho litho would be much better value.
But the dp thing is an interesting project to do for its own sake as well..

 

[darkroommike]

A copy negative also offers the possibility of multiple prints and better contrast control from slide to slide.

 

[Lee Birder]

thank you for your thoughtful responses!
Making copy negatives may indeed be better in the long run.
Does anyone here have a favorite film for making copy negatives?
And any tips on the process?
Any and all help is much appreciated

 

[pdeeh]

I'm at a very early stage and skill level of making copy negatives, but I am doing a lot of it at the moment, so it is uppermost in my mind.

I describe how I am doing things (at the moment) here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Another forum member started a thread recently which has good info in it: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

But this thread at LFPF is the one where real expertise is on show, not my fumblings: http://www.largeformatphotography.i...php?132055-Enlarged-negatives-with-ortho-film so I'd recommend browsing that thoroughly.

You do have the advantage of starting with positives so the process is reduced by whole step and this reduces the opportunity for error.

Good luck and do report back on progress!

 

[bvy]

Ilford FP4 is supposed to be good for this.

 

[Darkroom317]

At the museum where I work I have done several hundred copy negatives of prints, slide and some lantern slides. We use FP4+ for all of the copy work. Prints are copied on the copy stand as normal. When I have slides, I move the light table over to the copy stand. The results are pretty good. At one point I inquired with Harman about printing directly on their positive paper. They said that no one they knew of had tried it and couldn't offer much advice. It was out of stock at the time and so I abandoned the idea.

 

[Lee Birder]

pdeeh, bvy and Darkroom317- I am so grateful for your help! I will work through the links to other forum posts pdeeh provided, and consider fp4 for the work. If anyone else has any tips or advice, I would very much appreciate it.

 

[pdeeh]

One of the advantages of using an ortho film (doesn't have to be lith, could be ilford ortho) is being able to work by safelight, while using a pan film like fp4 precludes that.

I think darkroom317 is referring to a rephotographing method?

If so that's certainly another option .

 

[Darkroom317]

One of the advantages of using an ortho film (doesn't have to be lith, could be ilford ortho) is being able to work by safelight, while using a pan film like fp4 precludes that.

I think darkroom317 is referring to a rephotographing method?

If so that's certainly another option .

Yes. I rephotograph them on a light table on a copy stand with a 45mm camera as my predecessors have done. Never considered using othro film for it. I may have to try it. It is what we used in college to make enlarged negatives for alt process.

 

[bvy]

Ortho litho is VERY contrasty. That's not to say it's not tamable, but it could be a challenge. A pan film would be more forgiving. Depends on how important it is to work under a safelight, I suppose.

 

[Darkroom317]

Ortho litho is VERY contrasty. That's not to say it's not tamable, but it could be a challenge. A pan film would be more forgiving. Depends on how important it is to work under a safelight, I suppose.

That may be part of why I didn't consider using it. I used it in camera for some work and managed to get some images but it was difficult to work with.

 

[Terry Christian]

Why not try x-ray film? It'll preserve your ability to work under a safelight.

 

[pdeeh]

Ortho litho is VERY contrasty. That's not to say it's not tamable, but it could be a challenge. A pan film would be more forgiving. Depends on how important it is to work under a safelight, I suppose.

It is what I'm using for my interpositives and enlarged negatives, and I'm not having problems with contrast.
Of course I am working to my own taste and I'm using it for a particular project which has it's own aesthetic. What suits me might not suit another person.
But I don't want to divert this thread off on a discussion on that when there are a few already on the subject.

Why not try x-ray film? It'll preserve your ability to work under a safelight.

I'd try that if I was in the US. It's so damn cheap there I don't know why everybody doesn't use it for everything LF
(Over here ... not cheap, even if you can get it. Which you can't, it has to be bought in from the US -- shipping/import duty/VAT mount up to make it hardly any less expensive than buying Fomapan.)

 

[Nodda Duma]

Please post your test results...I'd be curious to see how you do.

-Jason

 

[removed account4]

u would also so the rephotograph method, as darkroom317 suggests
having had lantern slides and made contact prints from them to reproduce
paper negatives, dirct positives are fun, but in the end a film internegative
saves time and money and effort.
have fun!

 

[pdeeh]

I'm actually writing this between making negatives from interpositives.
I tell you what, it really really gives me a proper understanding of "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights"

 

[darkroommike]

I don't find working with panchro films to be a great inconvenience but ortho films are fine if you don't want to work in the dark. Sadly, except for x-ray films and ortho lith films, there are very few ortho emulsions around, Ilford Ortho Plus comes to mind, haven't used it-YET!-but it seems similar to the old Kodak Commercial Ortho film.