Choices for your Photo Chemistry ~ Negative Density for Silver Printing

In the last post I brought up view camera photographers who remain with film, and marrying that with enlarged digital negatives for contacting printing. That process can be said to be the centerpiece of this blog. That is not to say 35mm or 2 1/4 film enthusiasts aren't invited, or our newer brethren of digital photographers. The point of the process is ending up with a printable negative of the desired size for contact printing. For the purpose of printing with silver or platinum/palladium, standard negatives, as in density range, do not print well, to say the least. I will be referring to silver when discussing density range, as if the negative is sufficient to print in silver it will print well in platinum/palladium.

To arrive at a density range sufficient for printing on silver, the negative needs to be somewhere in the range of 50% more dense than a negative one uses in enlargers. Densitometrically speaking that would be in the range of Log E 1.2 to 1.8. The density scale is logarithmic, so a difference from a standard Log E .55 to .75 (projection enlarger densities~condenser and cold light head, respectively) is significant. Negatives of that density range wouldn't print on standard bromide papers. I will be covering the subject of density range quite a bit, being it has everything to do with the outcome of the print. The same principle applies to hand coated printing as projection enlargement printing. In order for a fully realized print, full range deep black to crisp whites, without suppressing the middle tones, the negative has to matched to the paper being printed on. Same with hand coated printing.

Considering I am advocating film and developing said resultant negatives, I will make the case here that buying and using prepackaged chemistry is a mistake, for two reasons. First, today's films do not require an M/Q developer, and secondly, the cost to do so is wasteful. I'm going to assume anyone dealing with view cameras and film, they also, mostly likely, have a space dedicated for their craft. If you tear open a chemical bag to develop your negatives, think Bisquick. Prepackaged flour, baking powder and salt. How much harder is it to take ingredients from three containers and mix them into water, than tearing open said bag?

A quick check shows a bag of D76 to mix 1 liter costs $5 If you are developing sheet film, that adds up quickly. Mixing your own negative developer not only saves you a lot of money over time, but allows you to make more than one very usable formulas. The better explanation will come at a later time as the subject isn't terribly difficult, but needs context to be useful or make sense. There is a negative formula I used for years that in my book is the best all around general formula I ever used. It is over a hundred years old, before M/Q developers, one of the things that needs to be explained.

The short version is that the Q stands for Hydroquinone, a reducing agent (developer) used in conjunction with the M, Metol. Metal is slower acting but longer lasting, while hydroquinone is more volatile in action but shorter lived. When combined the two create what is referred to a 'superadditivity', sort of the Gestalt effect; the result being more than the sum of its parts. I will tell you that hydroquinone is not needed for negative development. It has great use when printing silver gelatin prints though.

That quick check also shows at today's prices one can invest $30 in three chemicals to produce 20 liters of developer, formulated to be used 1:10. Any idea how many rolls of film that is or how many sheets of film that develops? Those three chemicals include Metol, Sodium Sulfite and Sodium Carbonate. Reducer, Preservative and Accelerator. No Restrainer is necessary. The formula I speak of is Beutler 105. It is a semi-compensating developer that has a great shelf life, with a standard developing ratio of 1:10 for 8 minutes (ISO 125). Another very good formula can also be mixed from just two of these chemicals. I will get into that as well as characteristics for explaining what a semi-compensating developer is and does, later.

I will also get into how to do simple density testing in order to match the densities to the silver being used, as one can print using 10% silver solution or 12%. The images I am showing from my old portfolio were all printed a saturated silver solution of 13%, on two healthy coats of that silver solution onto the paper. One of the premier papers to use for hand coated prints is Arches Platine 100% Rag paper. It was the first paper created exclusively for platinum printing. The negatives I used for that portfolio are grouped around the Log E 1.2 density range.

Last word on the chemistry for now, hopefully not a shameless plug, that all the above information and a whole lot more is in my book Alchemist's Guide; to Black & White Photo Chemistry, in which I cover the negative and the process as it takes place in development, the chemistry and formulas as well as conversion tables. I kept it short as a useful primer or lab book. I copied all the formulas at the end of the book for easy reference in a lab setting. Just an FYI. To check it out, click on the book on the right side of the page.

Salted Silver Print ~ "Florence Bay"
1986 ~ 5x7 Unique
Florence, Oregon