Re: Plus X reversal

From: Jim Carlile (email suppressed)
Date: Fri May 02 2008 - 03:30:52 PDT

It would seem that reversing positive film stock to copy a positive original
is such a good idea that there must be something wrong with it!
The whole idea would be a nice replacement for Kodak's now-gone B/W reversal
print stock-- so there must be some problems doing it--- but for a work
print it might be alright...
It's funny, just a couple of days ago I was reading how Kodak in the 80's
actually had a whole new 35mm Eastman MP system ready to go, that relied upon
reversal camera original instead of ECN. But it turns out that not only were
the studios completely uninterested in this idea, but the results were not so
much better than they had to be to compete with traditional 35mm neg-pos.
Apparently they did extensive tests, and discovered that neg-pos print
quality on the big screen when projected was even better than reversal original,
even better than Kodachrome. And that was with the original camera reversal
projected on the screen. It was fine to a point, but the bigger the screen, the
worse the reversal broke down by comparison. So they never released the
Moral is, I guess neg-pos is the way to go.
In a message dated 5/2/2008 12:26:02 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
email suppressed writes:

Presumably the contrast would be very high. The reason we're considering
this is because the original post was from someone who wanted a print from some
Plus X original. I don't think anyone's proposing it as an alternative to the
neg-pos route,

Nicky Hamlyn.

**************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family
favorites at AOL Food.

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.