From: Robert Schaller (email suppressed)
Date: Thu May 01 2008 - 22:12:57 PDT
What Rob says makes sense to me; reversal film is made to have the high
maximum density and high contrast of a projection print, whereas negative
film is made to have the low contrast and low maximum density that you want
in a negative. Processing a negative stock as reversal means trying to get
a higher density and contrast than the stock is designed to generate, and
likewise (the opposite) if one tries to use a reversal stock as a
conventional negative from which to make prints. You can do either thing,
but you're working against the inherent nature of the stock, which means
maybe it's interesting!
If you want something with the same contrast and density properties as
reversal that is developed as reversal, but which happens to be "negative,"
then using the same reversal stock sounds like exactly the right starting
point. Since really all the discriminatory development in the reversal
process happens in the first developer, I would say, DON'T cross process it
(at least in the sense of treating it just like a negative with negative
chemistry): use the SAME first developer exactly as if you were processing
it as reversal, but instead of going from the first developer to the bleach,
go instead directly to the fixer, and then hypoclear, and then wash. Just
skip the bleach and the clearing bath altogether. That should give a
"negative" image with the qualities of reversal. Using a positive developer
like D97 should come close (i.e., process it as if it were a print), but I
wouldn't expect to get good results from actually cross-processing in a
negative developer like D96.
On 5/1/08 4:23 PM, "Robert Houllahan" <email suppressed> wrote:
>> What I'm confused about is why anyone would want to 'reverse' camera
>> reversal, if negative film is already available...
> Because even though it becomes negative it still looks exactly like
> reversal, so if you want the reversal look and you are making a print
> or want to intercut Reversal with negative for an answer print a X-
> process is a good tool and easy to do from a Lab pov as long as you
> are setup to run B+W negative, as we are.
> Robert Houllahan
> email suppressed
> Filmmaker / Cinematographer
> VP Cinelab Inc.
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.