Printing slides to 4x5 film

[BetterSense]

I want to try printing some color 35mm slides onto 4x5 film so that I can print them onto black-and-white paper. I have not the slightest idea how much exposure it will take to expose a 100-speed 4x5 negative on an enlarger, and in this case it takes 6 minutes to develop a test-strip!

If anyone has ever done this and has at least a ballpark aperture/time on the enlarger it would help a lot. I have a timer that can do 1/10ths of a second.

 

[Robert Brummitt]

You're talking about Internegs. Do a search on this and other photo sites. I would do a gray scape test to find the best exposure. But if memory serves me, I would start at f11-16 at 7 seconds.
R

 

[keithwms]

Well then it'll only take you 6 minutes to determine the right exposure. Just unmask the b&w film in 10 second increments, just as you would do for paper. Develop, and you will have your answer. Ballpark: it might be ~5 seconds at f/11.

Your b&w film is panchromatic, right? I use tmax for this kind of thing.

Use dilute or compensating developer.

You may find that you want to dodge highlights a bit- highlight transitions tend to come out too fast when you do this.

 

[BetterSense]

Just unmask the b&w film in 10 second increments, just as you would do for paper. Develop, and you will have your answer. Ballpark: it might be ~5 seconds at f/11.

Would it be profitable to shoot a test slide at a color chart/grey card/step chart and try to do something technical with determining the best interneg exposure?

Or you could a normal representative slide, test in 10-second strips, and pick the one strip on the negative that looks decent? Or, contact print the resulting test-internet using minimum time for max black through clear base, and pick the best looking strip.

I'm using Arista EDU ultra film currently because it's what I have.

 

[Ian Grant]

Copying to 5x4 is over-kill, 6x9 is enough. In fact with the right 35mm film a slide cpier works well. APX25 has gone, but EFKE KB25 would be a good alternative,

Another way is print onto B&W paper, and reversal process.

Ian

 

[Photo Engineer]

I set my enlarger up to give a 4x5 coverage as if I were making a 4x5 print from 35mm. I then mount the 35mm slide in the negative carrier and expose that, in focus of course, onto a 4x5 sheet of film in a 4x5 print frame. I use Portra 160 VC, but you can use any film. Kodak suggests underdeveloping the film however in order to avoid excess contrast.

I use a 100 C + 20 M to give approximately daylight color to the light and use 1/2" at f22 for starters. This gives me about a 3 x 4 negative with surprisingly good quality. I use a pull process of 2' 45" instead of 3' 15" for color neg and so you might want to do something similar with B&W.

Reversal film onto reversal paper is the worst of all possible worlds IMHO.

PE

 

[Ian Grant]

Why use Portra 160, when you want B&W Ron

Personally I'd always bmake an interneg as Ron (PE) is suggesting, it's easy and give good results.

Where I'd dis-agree is that Reversal to Reversal would almost certainly give the highest quality results, I've seen it done with B&W slides onto B&W paper, and have read various articles on doing the same from colour slides. But I've not done this myself, and I think the degree of skill & experience needed is rather high to achieve this.

Ian

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ian;

Please listen to the interview just posted on Inside Analog photography. I explain the whole thing as much as can be done without a lot of blackboard graphs and some math.

Basically though, the toe and shoulder of a film or paper represent areas of data compression. When you do pos-pos printing you are adding double compression by placing the toe on the toe and shoulder on the shoulder. Making an interneg will help a tiny bit, but not as much as you would get with a real internegative film which has an upswept shoulder to even out the compression.

The fact that I do color is inconsequential. The same methodology can be used for B&W. I have done it.

PE

 

[Ian Grant]

Ron, in theory I agree with you, but I've seen the opposite. I doubt you or I or David at dr5 could achieve what I saw back in 1972.

I saw stunning B&W Transparencies and B&W reversal prints made from them, by a PhD research student at a lecture. The images whether 35mm slide or print were outstanding quality. There is a major difference between B&W & Color reversal processing because the B&W can be tailored to the film and exposure range, just as with negative film, Colour is very different.

Ian

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ian;

I have also seen stunning pos-pos pictures, but every one of them involved intermediate color masks (if color was intended) and highlight masks for correcting errors in color and tone scale. Otherwise, the photos suffered in some way in either the shadows or highlights or both.

PE

 

[Ian Grant]

We'll agree to differ as you're talking Colour & I'm talking B&W

But then let's be truthful both of us have seen superb Cibachomes of transparencies, with no masking etc, but that's not the Norm.

Ian