[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: bleach question

Wilf Giovanella writes:-

	>I have been told
	>that it is not recommended for neg.

I'm not sure that it's "recommended" at all - neg or print. 

	 >It seems that there is no latitude.  The neg is so dense that the
	>it is impossible to get an acceptable picture from it.

Bleach bypass increases the contrast substantially, therefore by definition
any variation in exposure has substantially more effect on the neg image.
Hence less (or no) latitude.  So far as density is concerned, a common
option is to reduce the camera exposure by 1 -2 stops to keep the negative
at a printable (or transferable) density.  This is OK, but it introduces the
next problem which is  . . .

	 > With bleach bypass the negative can be restored to normal by
sending it
	>to the lab for the bleach and washes. 

This is theoretically true but can be dangerously misunderstood. Rewashing
the neg will restore it to  a normal process result.  BUT if you have
underexposed the negative to avoid the previous situation, then you will
finish up with an underexposed (i.e. thin, grainy, flat) negative. Probably
exactly what you wanted to avoid with bleach bypass in the first place.

There's a lot of discussion about bleach bypass and related techniques on
the cinematography list website at http://www.cinematography.net/.

  Dominic Case
  Atlab Australia

Thanks to Cinema Products for support in 1998.
No product marketing allowed on the main TIG.  Contact rob at alegria.com
1013 subscribers in 39 countries on Tue Aug 25 21:41:03 PDT 1998 
subscribe/unsubscribe with that Subject: to telecine-request at alegria.com
complete information on the TIG website http://www.alegria.com/tig3/