Resources for learning about reproduction photography

Hi all,

I would like to learn about reproduction photography and duplication.

I have a decent understanding of sensitometry, but I would like to learn more about tone reproduction. I would especially appreciate a rigorous mathematical explanation as well as recommendations on how to choose photographic material, exposure and development to obtain faithful tone reproduction. I want to make high quality archival duplicates of both negative and positive materials. Practical considerations such as how to reduce dust, how to collimate a duplication setup, and how to obtain optimal film flatness would also be helpful.

Can you recommend any books that explain these topics at an advanced level?

Thanks,
Ian

..i think the subject was covered in one of the Kodak data books - but i can't remember which one. A problem with using photo-films for copying/duping is that they have an S-shaped characteristic curve wich causes a distortion of tones. So, you want to select a film/dev combination that has as straight and long a curve as possible. In color slide duping Kodak made a film for flash exposure with unity contrast. (to preserve the high-contrast of the original, whilst not increasing it). Of course the problem of chromogenic duping of a chromogenic original remained...
Film flatness - depends on your format. Possibly a vacuum back for LF on a vertical copy camera.
Alignment: using mirror on copy stand - the reflection of your camera lens can be centered so no tilt is present.

https://www.amazon.com/Copying-Duplicating-Black-White-publication/dp/0879853433

You can also use the search string “Kodak book, copying and duplicating” in eBay.

The later editions of the Kodak Duplication and Restoration guides are valuable and tend to turn up in used book outlets, but are no longer in print, so some of the recommended films are no longer around either. TMax 100 is an excellent substitute for numerous applications. Most of this kind of thing has switched over to digital, and Ctein has good books both routes. An efficient copystand with balanced lighting is important whenever duplicating prints onto film. For film to film, a precise contact frame is needed. Enlarged film to film dupes or internegs is a bit more complicated. It would be counterproductive to introduce math when what really counts is done on basic logarithmic film curve plotting graphs interpretable visually. And after some experience, one can just look at a final neg over a lightbox and recognize what they've got.

Thanks, this is helpful!

Drew, what constitutes a precise contact frame? High quality glass? I also need to get way better at dealing with dust. Someday my dream is to have a clean room darkroom. Right now it's next to my laundry room

With regards to math this is what I mean:

Let's say I start with a slide and I want to make a high quality dupe. My guess is that I want to make an interneg with all of the image data reproduced onto the straight line portion of the curve so as to avoid compression. I'm guessing that in order to fit all the image onto the straight line portion, the interneg will be developed to a gamma of 0.7 or something, at the highest. Ok, now I have an interneg and I want to make a positive. What material do I use to make the positive, and how do I develop it? I'll need a gamma of something like 1.4, but I don't know how I could attain this without further compression of the original. Is there such a thing as a high gamma material with an exceptionally long straight line portion?

"What material do I use to make the positive, and how do I develop it?"
...there used to be an Eastman cine titling film for this. Rephotograph your interneg using a 'macro lens and illumitran or equiv'

While I own a Leitz Reprovit, for accuracy of reproduction today I use a scanner. Cleaner and faster.

Neil Grant said:

Rephotograph your interneg using a 'macro lens and illumitran or equiv'

Click to expand...

What's the quality difference in contact printing vs repro-ing with a camera? When I try contact printing, I get dust problems, but when I use a camera, it is very hard to get perfect alignment/flatness and also to achieve an exact 1:1 reproduction ratio. Obviously there's a quality reduction inherent in using a lens due to the non-unity MTF curve. I have a 135mm f/5.6 S-Planar C for my Hasselblad; I'm not sure how much sharpness/contrast I'm losing by using that instead of contact printing.

guangong said:

today I use a scanner. Cleaner and faster.

Click to expand...

I also digitize, but there's no way of doing a reasonable quality output from a digital scan of 6x13 stereo plates. I mean, if I had a Hollywood grade film recorder, then sure, but I'm not aware of anyone who offers this service.

Thanks all for the recommendations. I've ordered the Kodak book. If anyone has further tips on making high quality contact prints, that would be great. Thanks!

iandvaag said:

What's the quality difference in contact printing vs repro-ing with a camera? When I try contact printing, I get dust problems, but when I use a camera, it is very hard to get perfect alignment/flatness and also to achieve an exact 1:1 reproduction ratio. Obviously there's a quality reduction inherent in using a lens due to the non-unity MTF curve. I have a 135mm f/5.6 S-Planar C for my Hasselblad; I'm not sure how much sharpness/contrast I'm losing by using that instead of contact printing

Click to expand...

...not sure why you would have alignment problems - when using vertical copy stand this should be straightforward using a mirror. Rather than an interneg/contact, why not reversal procesing? That will save a lens/film combination. I used this arrangement (image) for making 35mm slides from b/w internegs (colour slide duping was also possible). TTL exposure with a Nikon F3 camera and Metz 60. No worries about extn factor, camera shake or wrong colour temp. I think the flash exposure also softened the contrast because of HI RLF.

Neil Grant said:

not sure why you would have alignment problems - when using vertical copy stand this should be straightforward using a mirror.

Click to expand...

Well, I don't have a copy stand, I've been using a tripod and shooting horizontally with my diffusion enlarger hear on its side as a light source. This makes so much sense, thank you!

I would love to hear more about your color slide duping process. Do I understand correctly that you are recombining three separate B/W negs onto slide film in camera? That's incredible! I have a few questions:
1) How did you achieve registration of the negatives?
2) Did you make the B&W separations yourself? Did you need to do contrast masking, pre-flashing, or just develop to a lower contrast when making the separations?
3) What light source are you using? It looks very impressive.

Thanks so much, Neil! I've been trying to figure out a viable process for duping slides for ages.

..i thought a photo of a viable slide duping and internerneg system would help you. You really do need a copy stand and flash lighting to do this well.
There's nothing as compilcated as colour-seperations going on here though. Colour slide films were 'duped' onto Ektachrome SE low contrast duplicating film (not sure if it's still available).
Internegs from b/w originals probably went onto Pan F. Black and white slides from b/w negs went on to Eastman 5363 fine-grain Release Positive (a blue sensitive, motion picture, negative film stock).
The purpose-made 'illuminator' houses a Metz 60 flashgun, whose power is controlled 'TTL' by A NIkon F3 fitted with a 55mm Micro-Nikkor. Light is directed into the 'folded-light' reflex box, containing a 45 degree reflector and a pair of fluoresent modelling lamps for viewing and focusing. The 5x4 in stage ontop was taken from a Bowens 'Illumitran'. Alignment was tested using a mirror placed on the 'copy panel' - then focusing the cmaera on it and ensuring the image of the Macro lens was seen to be in the centre of the viewfinder (just normal alignment technique). The 'device' was made in 1986/7 and used for about 15 years - until digital systems came along. IIRC you had to 'gaffer tape off' the Metz's built in sensor (not TTL) because the high light intensity in the illumminator could cause it to fail (then the flash would fire at full-power all the time). Maybe you can source some used equipment to do your duping job, or get something specially made. Hope this helps.

Thanks for the info, Neil. Seems like a pretty neat setup!