# Who needs film?



## 480sparky (Apr 24, 2015)

Had an idea last night that I just had to try today.

Instead of buying film to put in a camera, why not put in paper, develop it, then scan & invert the image?

So this afternoon I cut up some Ilford MG to fit into the Kodak 3A, and taped it in place.








The result:  A 'paper' negative!






A quick scan & crop nets a positive image:







Not something I'd do every day, but a fun little experiment!  Plus, the paper can be handled with a safelight instead of total darkness.


----------



## ronlane (Apr 24, 2015)

That's really a good idea. Nice image too.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 24, 2015)

no freakn way........


----------



## Derrel (Apr 24, 2015)

The 1840's meet the 2010's!!!!!

What a gorgeous aspect ratio, and size, that old folder shoots at. Contact prints from those old negatives must have been pretty nice.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Apr 24, 2015)

Cool. How long an exposure?

With this subject, you probably just could have left it as it came out of the camera (reversed). No, un-reversed...


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 24, 2015)

F/64, 11 seconds. Overcast.


----------



## Designer (Apr 24, 2015)

Saves money AND time!  Well done!


----------



## limr (Apr 24, 2015)

I'm still keeping my fingers crossed that Ilford manages to find a way to keep making their Harman Direct Positive paper. I built my pinhole specifically for the direct positive paper. I've still got a few sheets of it, but then it's onto making paper negatives. Actually, it does fit 4x5 so I could also use sheet film in the pinhole. And all of it can be developed in Caffenol! 



 

Yours looks amazing!

I believe you can also contact print as well with paper negatives.


----------



## Gary A. (Apr 24, 2015)

I've been having a bit of a problem fitting the paper into my Nikon 250 film back.


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 24, 2015)

Gary A. said:


> I've been having a bit of a problem fitting the paper into my Nikon 250 film back.




Try opening the back.


----------



## Gary A. (Apr 24, 2015)

Okay, I wasn't specific enough ... getting the motor to feed the paper at 6FPS.


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 24, 2015)

Gary A. said:


> Okay, I wasn't specific enough ... getting the motor to feed the paper at 6FPS.



Try perforating it for the sprockets.


----------



## ByronBrant (Apr 24, 2015)

Wow. That's cool. Can that be done with regular white paper?


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 24, 2015)

ByronBrant said:


> Wow. That's cool. Can that be done with regular white paper?



Sure.......... if you coat it with a light-sensitive emulsion.


----------



## Gary A. (Apr 25, 2015)

480sparky said:


> Gary A. said:
> 
> 
> > Okay, I wasn't specific enough ... getting the motor to feed the paper at 6FPS.
> ...


Aaaahhh ... that's the trick. What ISO/ASA does the paper come in?


----------



## smithdan (Apr 25, 2015)

Tried this with a Brownie No.3 Box couple of years ago , few trial and error runs to figure out the exposure.  No darkroom at the moment but lots of paper and some Dektol in a box in the garage.  Hopeful to get something up and running out there for the Summer.  Wonder if MG paper is receptive to yellow filters.


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 25, 2015)

ISO 4-6


----------



## Gary A. (Apr 25, 2015)

480sparky said:


> ISO 4-6


Okay ...


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 25, 2015)

smithdan said:


> .......Wonder if MG paper is receptive to yellow filters.



Probably not.  I figure printing paper is more like shooting film through a dark blue filter.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Apr 25, 2015)

How did you determine exposure time? educated guess? Not that I won't just probably go by your exposure time to try it out (because I will).

Most photo paper I think has an ASA/ISO in single digits. I've been doing lumen prints and the paper is slow but then again, faster than it might seem, even with vintage expired paper that would be fogged.

I can handle it long enough to get out of the black paper in existing subdued room light but if it's a sunny day I have to be careful getting it out and set up on the table in the window (have managed to get an occasional image of my thumb!). But I haven't tried doing anything like photograms with fresh paper.


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 25, 2015)

I used smaller pieces to start with.  Enough to cover the 6x7 mask I made.  I did 3 tests before I got close enough to try a full-size sheet, which turned out a bit light at 6 seconds.  So I increased exposure to 11 seconds.


----------



## PWhite214 (Apr 25, 2015)

Great idea, I want to try it with my Kodak Tourist. The shutter is 1/50, approximately.  

Phil


----------



## Torus34 (Apr 30, 2015)

Paper negatives are a mainstay of large format pinhole cameras.


----------



## 480sparky (Apr 30, 2015)

Torus34 said:


> Paper negatives are a mainstay of large format pinhole cameras.



Too bad Ilford Direct Positive paper is so hard to find........ and expensive as all git-out if you do.


----------



## Light Guru (Apr 30, 2015)

You should try x-ray film $32 for 100 sheets of 8x10 it's not sensitive to red light  so you can develop it under red safe light and the safe light also makes it easy to cut to what ever size you need. 

You can develop it with regular b&w film developer. Just be await that it has emulsion in both sides so it will use up developer faster and the negatives tend to be more dense. It also scratches easier then regular film. 

8x10 in. Fuji X-Ray Film for 32.00


----------

