The time has finally arrived to hook up with my old friend Harry to begin actually building a presentable UV printing box. I use the word box here being the best description as the standard 'fixture' just doesn't offer any advantages, but offers some disadvantages. A box is also easily made, and very cost effective. Also considered are the new realities of UV sources, aka blacklight bulbs, which are now thinner bulbs, from T12 (1 1/2") to T8 (1"), and that means either finding enough older bulbs, which have become something of a premium price, or half again as many thinner bulbs at a lower cost each. At this time I am leaning towards the T12 unit.
It might be useful to write an article or two on the printing light options and costs, as having a printing light available can mean every difference for a photographer wanting to print hand coated methods in an area where steady sunlight is missing or not easily used, for any number of reasons. I will also know much more about output levels, as in lumens or an equivalent measure. Online research suggests that a 20W blacklight bulb will output 20 lumens per watt, however, no one in lighting will agree to that, as measuring UV light using any form of white light metering isn't valid.
My box is designed to be 24"x24" using eight T12 florescent tubes, spaced 3/4" apart, between bulbs, or half the bulb width. This is to eliminate banding on the print if the light source is close. Banding being lines through the print where intensity of light drops off between the bulbs. Eight 20W bulbs equals 1600W of power, and at a distance from the print between 8" and 18", adjustable, an optimal printing distance can be found, being intensity of the light source (UV) alters the printing structure. Higher intensity of the light source will flatten a print more than a lower intensity, which takes longer to print in, which reciprocally increases the tonal range of the image. Sort of similar to compaction/expansion principles.
I will of course be updating the progress on this endeavor. Having that in hand will begin the real work towards printing in silver, toning in palladium, for now. Printing directly in platinum/palladium is the ultimate goal. That demands a good amount of money to accomplish, which relies upon print sales for funding. Something most of you reading this are directly aware of. Hence, being able to make up your own printing light might just be in the offing, and that may very well change the way you print...... Hopefully. That would be my quest.
Wednesday, August 31, 2016
Paper Negatives ~ Contact Printing
One of the things I found out early on was how well paper negatives worked. Using a bromide or even a slower chloride paper as a negative didn't work out well. Way too much textural quality to the papers leaving their traces in the printed image. Also, projection enlargement using a paper negative actually works, although needing a bunch more light, and, again, showcasing the textural qualities of the paper, exaggerated when enlarged. In the early years of the nineteen century paper negatives were used more than you would imagine. At that time, mostly fiber based papers were the stock, so the photographers waxed the negatives after developing, before printing. The waxing allowed the light to pass through the paper much easier, and with less artifacts in the image.
Jump fifty, or so, years later and RC coated stock paper is ubiquitous, even in multi-grade varieties. RC paper makes a most excellent negative. It is pre-cut to size, the coating negates the paper textural artifact problem, and the light passes through the paper almost as easily as a celluloid negative. Being I had a 5x7 view camera, obtaining 5x7 cut sheet RC paper was cheap and easily found. I have a stack of such negatives that print ever so nicely on silver gelatin papers.
The speed rating of grade 2 RC paper is basically 6 ISO. The sheets are loaded just like any film in the cut film holders. A big advantage is during development, being it can be done under an amber light so you can watch the image come up and develop in, and when it gets to where you like it, simply pull it and stick it in stop bath. Easy visual inspection developing. You merely plop that paper negative on top a piece of printing paper, pop on a tungsten light for about four seconds and develop. That negative can also print very nicely on gum dichromate prints. That is the cheapest, easiest learned process, although one of the most difficult to fully master.
This print is the outcome of a paper negative. This print has been seen as a gum print, with thirteen print color layers. It was the last gum I printed at that time, now thirty years ago. I also printed it on chloride paper before I chose to ultimately print it in gum. It was that print that I decided I would not print more than one gum of any image. They are unique and not something to be replicated, if done right.
Silver Gelatin Contact Print ~ Paper Negative ~ "Pond at Sunset"
1984 ~ 5"x7" ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon
Jump fifty, or so, years later and RC coated stock paper is ubiquitous, even in multi-grade varieties. RC paper makes a most excellent negative. It is pre-cut to size, the coating negates the paper textural artifact problem, and the light passes through the paper almost as easily as a celluloid negative. Being I had a 5x7 view camera, obtaining 5x7 cut sheet RC paper was cheap and easily found. I have a stack of such negatives that print ever so nicely on silver gelatin papers.
The speed rating of grade 2 RC paper is basically 6 ISO. The sheets are loaded just like any film in the cut film holders. A big advantage is during development, being it can be done under an amber light so you can watch the image come up and develop in, and when it gets to where you like it, simply pull it and stick it in stop bath. Easy visual inspection developing. You merely plop that paper negative on top a piece of printing paper, pop on a tungsten light for about four seconds and develop. That negative can also print very nicely on gum dichromate prints. That is the cheapest, easiest learned process, although one of the most difficult to fully master.
This print is the outcome of a paper negative. This print has been seen as a gum print, with thirteen print color layers. It was the last gum I printed at that time, now thirty years ago. I also printed it on chloride paper before I chose to ultimately print it in gum. It was that print that I decided I would not print more than one gum of any image. They are unique and not something to be replicated, if done right.
Silver Gelatin Contact Print ~ Paper Negative ~ "Pond at Sunset"
1984 ~ 5"x7" ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon
Tuesday, August 30, 2016
Contact Printing ~ Bromide Papers
For whatever reasons at the time, I was enticed by the warm tones of the chloride papers. The tonal range for those papers tended to be longer than for most bromide papers. As most know, silver gelatin papers have a rather short tonal range compared to a negative, perhaps fifty tonal gradations compared to hundreds potentially for a negative. Bromide papers are a bit shorter scaled than chloride papers, which are also a bit slower than bromide papers.
It was those warm tones that reminded me of the old palladium prints of the ancients around the turn of the century, nineteen century. I confess I did truly love the deep rich blacks that could be had using a bromide paper, which I'm sure is what captivates many black and white printers. I imagine bringing up contact printing to photographers today is like discussing the awesomeness of finely made horse bridles or hula hoops. What can I say, they are beautiful, and I would argue not the same finished appearance as a projected enlargement of the same image, side by side. The contact print is going to win that comparison hands down. So why is the world would anyone today want to do it when there is digital printing, when in fact that is precisely the reason, because it is now easy to print an enlarged digital negative, and for contact printing on silver gelatin papers, no need for altering the negative before printing. Although... I would tell you that tweaking the negative to make it sing is also another benefit of this method.
One of the photographers that was brought up for study and exaltation when I was studying the craft was Edward Weston, and his penchant for simplicity. Like his eventual discarding of a light meter to rely upon the light falling on his hand, either in shade or sunlight, for deciding the setting for his shot, as well as the development of the negative. His primary method was through inspection during development, and that, is amazing. For printing, he used a hanging bare bulb for contact printing to bromide papers, using Amidol, for what he believed were unmatched blacks. His "Pepper" print still hangs in the one room cabin in Carmel that his grandson now lives in. That print is now worth $1.2 million.
Being I'm rambling on about contact printing I'm leaving a sample of a bromide print. At the sake of repetition I mention again, for now, I must talk bout and showcase images I printed thirty years ago, until I have a UV printing box and printing room built and ready for printing. That will be some weeks yet, thus, you are stuck reading about things that have already happened. Soon, however, I will have images to show of hand coated prints using digital negatives. Showing test examples that are not yet dialed in, is a very bad idea. . . . Soon though.
Silver Gelatin Contact Print ~ Paper Negative ~ "Quiet Spot on the River"
1984 ~ 5"x7" ~ Private Collection
Eugene, Oregon
It was those warm tones that reminded me of the old palladium prints of the ancients around the turn of the century, nineteen century. I confess I did truly love the deep rich blacks that could be had using a bromide paper, which I'm sure is what captivates many black and white printers. I imagine bringing up contact printing to photographers today is like discussing the awesomeness of finely made horse bridles or hula hoops. What can I say, they are beautiful, and I would argue not the same finished appearance as a projected enlargement of the same image, side by side. The contact print is going to win that comparison hands down. So why is the world would anyone today want to do it when there is digital printing, when in fact that is precisely the reason, because it is now easy to print an enlarged digital negative, and for contact printing on silver gelatin papers, no need for altering the negative before printing. Although... I would tell you that tweaking the negative to make it sing is also another benefit of this method.
One of the photographers that was brought up for study and exaltation when I was studying the craft was Edward Weston, and his penchant for simplicity. Like his eventual discarding of a light meter to rely upon the light falling on his hand, either in shade or sunlight, for deciding the setting for his shot, as well as the development of the negative. His primary method was through inspection during development, and that, is amazing. For printing, he used a hanging bare bulb for contact printing to bromide papers, using Amidol, for what he believed were unmatched blacks. His "Pepper" print still hangs in the one room cabin in Carmel that his grandson now lives in. That print is now worth $1.2 million.
Being I'm rambling on about contact printing I'm leaving a sample of a bromide print. At the sake of repetition I mention again, for now, I must talk bout and showcase images I printed thirty years ago, until I have a UV printing box and printing room built and ready for printing. That will be some weeks yet, thus, you are stuck reading about things that have already happened. Soon, however, I will have images to show of hand coated prints using digital negatives. Showing test examples that are not yet dialed in, is a very bad idea. . . . Soon though.
Silver Gelatin Contact Print ~ Paper Negative ~ "Quiet Spot on the River"
1984 ~ 5"x7" ~ Private Collection
Eugene, Oregon
Monday, August 29, 2016
The Joy of Contact Printing
I find it interesting to note the changing grail of photography over the years. It has been my observation that there are different camps within photography, as well as without, each having a different direction and orthodoxy. I also see it as cyclic in nature. Interestingly enough, it is usually technological advancements which tend to drive much of the change in thinking, and orthodoxy.
Case in point. There was a time when contact printing was the ultimate printing method, for its faithful replication of the print negative. That was also when photographers who wanted to print to 8x10 carried a large camera around to do so. When quality pre-coated printing papers came to be that was the go to method for printing. Platinotype papers were available, one company having almost two dozen varieties of platinum coated papers to choose from. If only, today. I would be a dedicated convert to that company. Also at that time silver enriched printing papers became ubiquitous, referred to as "Gaslight Paper" for the saturated silver in the emulsion. Contact printing was still good, but also in the pipeline was the negative enlarger. After hours of online searching I have yet to find any source noting the year that the negative enlarger was first used, or who invented the device. How crazy is that. I can find out what Twiggy wore on her first camera appearance.
My point on the enlargement value of photographs, being simply that size definitely mattered and enlargements of silver gelatin prints began in earnest. No need to point out that platinotype papers need a UV light source, so projection enlargement wasn't going to happen on that count. And that began the death knell for platinotype papers. What took its place was a wide array of saturated silver paper types and brands, in chloride papers then bromide papers later.
When I built my first darkroom and began developing my own prints I had it in my head that very large prints were to come. That actually never happened. To print larger than 11x14 meant larger negatives to arrive at the creamy images I could get in an 8x10. Had it been the case that money was no object and I had a large studio/darkroom space perhaps I would have been making very large prints. Turns out, I found a Burke & James 5x7 view camera first. Size wasn't all that important after that.
What I am alluding to is simply that contact printing is different than projection enlargement, beyond the Duh point to mechanical differences. I am speaking aesthetically here. Contact printing can be applied to any medium, and needs nothing but a negative, paper and developing trays. Contact printing on silver gelatin printing paper requires only a bare bulb and printing trays, a la Edward Weston's personal methodology. There is a different look to an image contact printed instead of enlarged from a negative. I would urge any photographer to print the same image both ways and compare them side by side. Then decide which is the preferable method.
Back to technology advancements. Today making a digital negative for contract printing on silver gelatin papers is as easy as taking any digital image and printing it straight as is onto acetate. No special spectral enhancements or altering densities in major ways. It needs the same negative as used for projection enlargement. Then why do it? Because the result it is beautiful to see. Most of the photographers I have known who have tried contact printing, didn't give it up afterwards.
A sample of a contact print on chloride paper. This image was printed using a paper negative. The paper used was RC coated stock, grade 2, rated at 6 ASA (ISO) shot with the Burke & James view camera. A paper negative prints pretty much as well as a celluloid negative. I have dozens of examples to show for it. Some printed on bromide paper.
Silver Gelatin Contact Print ~ "Pond #3"
1984 ~ 5"x7" ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon
Case in point. There was a time when contact printing was the ultimate printing method, for its faithful replication of the print negative. That was also when photographers who wanted to print to 8x10 carried a large camera around to do so. When quality pre-coated printing papers came to be that was the go to method for printing. Platinotype papers were available, one company having almost two dozen varieties of platinum coated papers to choose from. If only, today. I would be a dedicated convert to that company. Also at that time silver enriched printing papers became ubiquitous, referred to as "Gaslight Paper" for the saturated silver in the emulsion. Contact printing was still good, but also in the pipeline was the negative enlarger. After hours of online searching I have yet to find any source noting the year that the negative enlarger was first used, or who invented the device. How crazy is that. I can find out what Twiggy wore on her first camera appearance.
My point on the enlargement value of photographs, being simply that size definitely mattered and enlargements of silver gelatin prints began in earnest. No need to point out that platinotype papers need a UV light source, so projection enlargement wasn't going to happen on that count. And that began the death knell for platinotype papers. What took its place was a wide array of saturated silver paper types and brands, in chloride papers then bromide papers later.
When I built my first darkroom and began developing my own prints I had it in my head that very large prints were to come. That actually never happened. To print larger than 11x14 meant larger negatives to arrive at the creamy images I could get in an 8x10. Had it been the case that money was no object and I had a large studio/darkroom space perhaps I would have been making very large prints. Turns out, I found a Burke & James 5x7 view camera first. Size wasn't all that important after that.
What I am alluding to is simply that contact printing is different than projection enlargement, beyond the Duh point to mechanical differences. I am speaking aesthetically here. Contact printing can be applied to any medium, and needs nothing but a negative, paper and developing trays. Contact printing on silver gelatin printing paper requires only a bare bulb and printing trays, a la Edward Weston's personal methodology. There is a different look to an image contact printed instead of enlarged from a negative. I would urge any photographer to print the same image both ways and compare them side by side. Then decide which is the preferable method.
Back to technology advancements. Today making a digital negative for contract printing on silver gelatin papers is as easy as taking any digital image and printing it straight as is onto acetate. No special spectral enhancements or altering densities in major ways. It needs the same negative as used for projection enlargement. Then why do it? Because the result it is beautiful to see. Most of the photographers I have known who have tried contact printing, didn't give it up afterwards.
A sample of a contact print on chloride paper. This image was printed using a paper negative. The paper used was RC coated stock, grade 2, rated at 6 ASA (ISO) shot with the Burke & James view camera. A paper negative prints pretty much as well as a celluloid negative. I have dozens of examples to show for it. Some printed on bromide paper.
Silver Gelatin Contact Print ~ "Pond #3"
1984 ~ 5"x7" ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon
Sunday, August 28, 2016
The Gum Print
I don't often write about the gum print as I find it to be something of a unique printing method. No precious metals involved, just clear gum Arabic and pigments. Well, that is stretching it a bit as two chemicals are involved; potassium dichromate and sodium bisulfite, the photo sensitive additive and clearing agent for that chemical, respectively.
The gum print is among the oldest of the historical processes, and it had its debut and acceptance as art during the golden era of the Secessionist movement and Stieglitz' gallery 291. Edward Steichen was one of the patron printers of the gum print. As I've noted before, the gum print was not known for having detail or texture in the image. Most prints were one or two print layers, leaving the image sort of dark overall, with predominantly color patches as patterns. The image could be said to be reminiscent of a 'photogram' or the printed outline of an object.
There is a reason for this. Registration. If you don't know how this is done, no gum print will rise above the photogram. There will come a time when I will fully disclose exactly how that is done. It has to be done exact or it doesn't work. Out of the dozens of articles on this blog will arise more photo books on the subjects I write about, like printing in silver, platinum/palladium, and gum, as part of the Alchemist's Guide; series. And no you aren't being baited, to sell said books. I will be giving all that information away for free, right here, as well as in the books, should you want to have that information at your fingertips at home.
This gum print was one of the few I enlarged at the time of the printing, being I had a 5x7 view camera at the time, so the only way for me to get a larger image size was by using paper negatives. I will be writing on that subject as well, soon. This image of the conductor of the Blue Goose train is a duo-tone image. Two gum printing layers; black, then 'brown'. It is the brown thing that is personal. The black is of course premixed, arriving at a second layer brown color that is subjective. As I remember it, I used two, perhaps three primary colors to arrive at the final color I identified as brown. I used four primary colors in watercolor; cyan, yellow, magenta, black (CYMK). There are good quality watercolor tubes corresponding to these colors. There is also a secret to the black I will get to later as well....
That duo-tone 'brown' color... I remind the reader the photographer is all but color blind to red/green, who scanned the image from a slide. I stand by the image but don't guarantee color fidelity whereupon digitally replicated. The original was correct.....
Gum Dichromate Print ~ "The Conductor"
1987 ~ 6"x9" ~ Unique
Blue Goose Train, Western Oregon
The gum print is among the oldest of the historical processes, and it had its debut and acceptance as art during the golden era of the Secessionist movement and Stieglitz' gallery 291. Edward Steichen was one of the patron printers of the gum print. As I've noted before, the gum print was not known for having detail or texture in the image. Most prints were one or two print layers, leaving the image sort of dark overall, with predominantly color patches as patterns. The image could be said to be reminiscent of a 'photogram' or the printed outline of an object.
There is a reason for this. Registration. If you don't know how this is done, no gum print will rise above the photogram. There will come a time when I will fully disclose exactly how that is done. It has to be done exact or it doesn't work. Out of the dozens of articles on this blog will arise more photo books on the subjects I write about, like printing in silver, platinum/palladium, and gum, as part of the Alchemist's Guide; series. And no you aren't being baited, to sell said books. I will be giving all that information away for free, right here, as well as in the books, should you want to have that information at your fingertips at home.
This gum print was one of the few I enlarged at the time of the printing, being I had a 5x7 view camera at the time, so the only way for me to get a larger image size was by using paper negatives. I will be writing on that subject as well, soon. This image of the conductor of the Blue Goose train is a duo-tone image. Two gum printing layers; black, then 'brown'. It is the brown thing that is personal. The black is of course premixed, arriving at a second layer brown color that is subjective. As I remember it, I used two, perhaps three primary colors to arrive at the final color I identified as brown. I used four primary colors in watercolor; cyan, yellow, magenta, black (CYMK). There are good quality watercolor tubes corresponding to these colors. There is also a secret to the black I will get to later as well....
That duo-tone 'brown' color... I remind the reader the photographer is all but color blind to red/green, who scanned the image from a slide. I stand by the image but don't guarantee color fidelity whereupon digitally replicated. The original was correct.....
Gum Dichromate Print ~ "The Conductor"
1987 ~ 6"x9" ~ Unique
Blue Goose Train, Western Oregon
Saturday, August 27, 2016
Digital Contrast Index Curves ~
The contrast index curves I have written about have to do with camera settings and photo chemistry for controlling the negative, for printing. There is what might be said to be reciprocal methods for that procedure in the digital form. Probably the best known purveyor of this procedure is Dan Burkholder, whom I have brought up before, as well as a Peter Hrhar writing "Salt Print" a very good book on silver printing. So, why am I adding my stupid two cents to the party. Because I have another way of doing things.
When you have developed enough negatives using different developers, then plotted the densities as a CI curve, the relationship between the shape of the curve and density range becomes distinct, and clear. And the reason I bring this up is I believe there needs to be a clarification to the procedure of increasing the density range of a negative, digitally. I have named two very good photographic methods for this procedure through two different photographers. Both methods are procedurally very similar, both beginning with the positive of the image. I do not do this.
The procedures as proscribed by the two forgoing photographers works. Using Photoshop, it begins with the positive image, and using the 'Curves' function, snapping on the straight line at regular points to simulate tonal range points, then raising them above the straight line of the curve, thereby increasing the densities along that line respectively. Then, reversing that image into a negative, thereby reversing the newly arrived at density curve. The basic final step is adding a color layer to the image and applying the most suitable color to retard UV light, selected from a color matrix print test demonstrating which color in a 100 (mixed) color matrix. Turns out, for platinum/palladium (ergo silver) green is the magic color. That (forest green) color is then overlaid the image, flattened and saved. That constitutes the digital print negative.
That procedure works, of course. But the shape of that curve also influences how that finished print will look, as a density range. To best demonstrate this, another lame chart makes it a bit easier.
The top graph represents the above method of increasing densities along the curve. That graph would be equal to the graph shown in their material. Notice that the top density of that curve doesn't move, isn't increased in proportion to the other densities. To compensate for this, the green color layer is added, retarding overall print time, increasing dMax and theoretically making for a longer print range. When looking at the finished images, the range is very close to being full, ranging from absolute black to crisp white. This is not a barb on their printing skills or methodology, as both stand up to scrutiny.
Speaking for myself, I am more comfortable working with the negative than the positive. I also can read CI curves and know where that will lead when printing. Being I am really crappy dealing with digital tools, and reciprocal outcomes, I work hard to keep it simple. My method is reverse of the first example. I reverse the image from positive to negative before beginning. I do not use the Curves function. It doesn't do what I want it to, which is shifting the straight line, as it is, straight leftwards, towards increased density, proportionally. Being I have yet to figure that out, I simply do it by hand, via inspection. Kind of reminds me of Bret Weston developing over 800 8"x10" negatives that Edward sent home from Europe one summer, through visual inspection. Wow.
My method is simple, yet not one that fits well with a standard measurable function built in. If I had a functioning densitometer, digital or otherwise I could make that happen. For now, it remains a more personal artistic expression method. My method uses Lightroom 4, which may leave out a lot of photographers that do not have this software, although anyone with current access to Photoshop also has access to Lightroom, now residing in the Cloud.
I use the four control slides of Lightroom; Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks, in that order as seen in the program. What I am looking for are those areas of the negative that I want prominent. I set the blacks first, eyeing those thin areas of the negative that represent black, then moving the slide until those areas, representing roughly Zone 1-2, making sure those densities are thin, then moving to the middle tones using the 'Shadows' slide, bringing up the the shadow details (same as first method) then I move on to 'Highlights' which affects the overall density of the image, and finally the 'Whites' and I bring up those densities until they are nearly opaque to the eye.
As bizarre as that seems, it also works. The difference between the two procedures is moving Zone 7-8 with the rest of the density ranges along the curve, not just the middle tones. What that also means is that you don't have to use a color layer for retarding UV light for increasing densities. Thus far, I have come to realize that an Epson printer can build up sufficient pigment density on a sheet of Inkpress acetate, or equivalent brand, to completely block UV light sufficiently to render that tonal range to remain blank white after the rest of the print is fully printed in, even when printed in direct sunlight, facing the sun.
Controlling that process to arrive at a standard practice in a measurable way is something I have yet to accomplish, although that is first on my agenda the moment my printing room has been completed. I will also have a 24"x24" UV printing box to keep things constant, although I will be able to move the print light from around 8" above print to 18" above print. That allows a wide range of printing times and contrast ranges for negatives.
What would be fabulous is having photographers add their experiences with their methods for digitally increasing densities of their negatives before printing, and I can only imagine this would be for hand coated printing. So, if you are out there, and interested in adding to the conversation, speak up.
When you have developed enough negatives using different developers, then plotted the densities as a CI curve, the relationship between the shape of the curve and density range becomes distinct, and clear. And the reason I bring this up is I believe there needs to be a clarification to the procedure of increasing the density range of a negative, digitally. I have named two very good photographic methods for this procedure through two different photographers. Both methods are procedurally very similar, both beginning with the positive of the image. I do not do this.
The procedures as proscribed by the two forgoing photographers works. Using Photoshop, it begins with the positive image, and using the 'Curves' function, snapping on the straight line at regular points to simulate tonal range points, then raising them above the straight line of the curve, thereby increasing the densities along that line respectively. Then, reversing that image into a negative, thereby reversing the newly arrived at density curve. The basic final step is adding a color layer to the image and applying the most suitable color to retard UV light, selected from a color matrix print test demonstrating which color in a 100 (mixed) color matrix. Turns out, for platinum/palladium (ergo silver) green is the magic color. That (forest green) color is then overlaid the image, flattened and saved. That constitutes the digital print negative.
That procedure works, of course. But the shape of that curve also influences how that finished print will look, as a density range. To best demonstrate this, another lame chart makes it a bit easier.
The top graph represents the above method of increasing densities along the curve. That graph would be equal to the graph shown in their material. Notice that the top density of that curve doesn't move, isn't increased in proportion to the other densities. To compensate for this, the green color layer is added, retarding overall print time, increasing dMax and theoretically making for a longer print range. When looking at the finished images, the range is very close to being full, ranging from absolute black to crisp white. This is not a barb on their printing skills or methodology, as both stand up to scrutiny.
Speaking for myself, I am more comfortable working with the negative than the positive. I also can read CI curves and know where that will lead when printing. Being I am really crappy dealing with digital tools, and reciprocal outcomes, I work hard to keep it simple. My method is reverse of the first example. I reverse the image from positive to negative before beginning. I do not use the Curves function. It doesn't do what I want it to, which is shifting the straight line, as it is, straight leftwards, towards increased density, proportionally. Being I have yet to figure that out, I simply do it by hand, via inspection. Kind of reminds me of Bret Weston developing over 800 8"x10" negatives that Edward sent home from Europe one summer, through visual inspection. Wow.
My method is simple, yet not one that fits well with a standard measurable function built in. If I had a functioning densitometer, digital or otherwise I could make that happen. For now, it remains a more personal artistic expression method. My method uses Lightroom 4, which may leave out a lot of photographers that do not have this software, although anyone with current access to Photoshop also has access to Lightroom, now residing in the Cloud.
I use the four control slides of Lightroom; Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks, in that order as seen in the program. What I am looking for are those areas of the negative that I want prominent. I set the blacks first, eyeing those thin areas of the negative that represent black, then moving the slide until those areas, representing roughly Zone 1-2, making sure those densities are thin, then moving to the middle tones using the 'Shadows' slide, bringing up the the shadow details (same as first method) then I move on to 'Highlights' which affects the overall density of the image, and finally the 'Whites' and I bring up those densities until they are nearly opaque to the eye.
As bizarre as that seems, it also works. The difference between the two procedures is moving Zone 7-8 with the rest of the density ranges along the curve, not just the middle tones. What that also means is that you don't have to use a color layer for retarding UV light for increasing densities. Thus far, I have come to realize that an Epson printer can build up sufficient pigment density on a sheet of Inkpress acetate, or equivalent brand, to completely block UV light sufficiently to render that tonal range to remain blank white after the rest of the print is fully printed in, even when printed in direct sunlight, facing the sun.
Controlling that process to arrive at a standard practice in a measurable way is something I have yet to accomplish, although that is first on my agenda the moment my printing room has been completed. I will also have a 24"x24" UV printing box to keep things constant, although I will be able to move the print light from around 8" above print to 18" above print. That allows a wide range of printing times and contrast ranges for negatives.
What would be fabulous is having photographers add their experiences with their methods for digitally increasing densities of their negatives before printing, and I can only imagine this would be for hand coated printing. So, if you are out there, and interested in adding to the conversation, speak up.
Revolving Subjects ~ The Why
I originally began this blog to write about black and white film and historical hand coated photographic processes. Since I began this blog I've been doing just that. Along the way there were a couple requests for developmental issues having to do with the negative, related to silver gelatin printing. Or any printing really. I have done so, using my own silver gelatin prints as example. As any blogger comes to realize immediately, there is just so much information on one subject. I am trying really, really hard not to get into the textbook mode of writing. But then how to lay out a case and explain the components without coming off as talking down to the readers, prancing.
I do stray from the focal theme of hand coated processes with issues having to do with photo chemistry and negatives, being that is the basis of all black and white printing. This subject is also what my book on black and white photo chemistry is all about. I try to keep away from commercial proselytizing on that count, but it does cover the subject, as I do on the blog. Photo chemistry is in my view the framework of black and white printing.
If you believe understanding the contrast index curve or density range is no longer necessary, or simply unneeded any longer, it remains alive and well, in digital form. Ask Dan Burkholder how important the density range is to printing. He's spent twenty years writing and printing using his contrast index theory using the "Curves" function in Photoshop. Curves, are Curves, done through texture texts and measured or altered using a mouse and cursor. The function is the same. Now that would make a useful article.... (next)
Unfortunately, I get very little feedback from visitors. I can only see the numbers, as a graph, which doesn't tell me a thing about said visitors. Are they the same visitors, am I addressing the subjects they want to read, should I stray from time to time for demonstration or interest.....?? What feedback I do get is encouraging, being there remain stalwart photographers of the black and white group, keeping the craft alive. A subsection of that larger group remains interested in hand coating methods, and I want to keep those individuals happy. I appreciate all forms of black and white photography but am firmly in the hand coated camp as a printer. Currently speaking.
Hope you enjoy the posts, and can take away something useful.
I do stray from the focal theme of hand coated processes with issues having to do with photo chemistry and negatives, being that is the basis of all black and white printing. This subject is also what my book on black and white photo chemistry is all about. I try to keep away from commercial proselytizing on that count, but it does cover the subject, as I do on the blog. Photo chemistry is in my view the framework of black and white printing.
If you believe understanding the contrast index curve or density range is no longer necessary, or simply unneeded any longer, it remains alive and well, in digital form. Ask Dan Burkholder how important the density range is to printing. He's spent twenty years writing and printing using his contrast index theory using the "Curves" function in Photoshop. Curves, are Curves, done through texture texts and measured or altered using a mouse and cursor. The function is the same. Now that would make a useful article.... (next)
Unfortunately, I get very little feedback from visitors. I can only see the numbers, as a graph, which doesn't tell me a thing about said visitors. Are they the same visitors, am I addressing the subjects they want to read, should I stray from time to time for demonstration or interest.....?? What feedback I do get is encouraging, being there remain stalwart photographers of the black and white group, keeping the craft alive. A subsection of that larger group remains interested in hand coating methods, and I want to keep those individuals happy. I appreciate all forms of black and white photography but am firmly in the hand coated camp as a printer. Currently speaking.
Hope you enjoy the posts, and can take away something useful.
First Compaction ~ Southwestern Light
One of the controls for black and white development I used a lot is compaction, especially shooting in the southwest. It's obviously the opposite of an expansion. Those terms describing what the development treatment does to the length of the contrast index curve, and density range. Development controls the high end of the densities, Zones 6, 7, 8, with each higher zone affected by further development, exponentially more than the zone before it. Zone 8 is more affected, in increased density, far more than Zone 6 for the same 1 minute increase in development time. For this reason I recommend using a semi-compensating developer.
I was visiting relatives in southern Arizona, photographing while visiting of course, noticing the seemingly contrasty looking landscape. What I was seeing was light intensity, not contrast. The spectral light value of the southwest is shifted towards the red end of the light spectrum, and panchromatic film is extra sensitive to the red spectrum range, thereby recording as 'more contrasty', it is not. There is the usual five stop range when metering a scene. There is just less shadow detail, an outcome of the high intensity of the ambient light, which in the desert seems extremely bright.
This shot was close in to some local critters habitat, showing off some deep blacks as well as bright whites in the offing. After printing it and selling it, I never felt it worthy of printing again.
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Habitat #2"
1985 ~ 8"x10" ~ Private collection
Southern Arizona Desert
I was visiting relatives in southern Arizona, photographing while visiting of course, noticing the seemingly contrasty looking landscape. What I was seeing was light intensity, not contrast. The spectral light value of the southwest is shifted towards the red end of the light spectrum, and panchromatic film is extra sensitive to the red spectrum range, thereby recording as 'more contrasty', it is not. There is the usual five stop range when metering a scene. There is just less shadow detail, an outcome of the high intensity of the ambient light, which in the desert seems extremely bright.
This shot was close in to some local critters habitat, showing off some deep blacks as well as bright whites in the offing. After printing it and selling it, I never felt it worthy of printing again.
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Habitat #2"
1985 ~ 8"x10" ~ Private collection
Southern Arizona Desert
Friday, August 26, 2016
Peering into the Shadow Details
The past two posted images were very early examples of the development regimen I learned, based upon standard practice, as per pre-mixed developer instructions, as well as common wisdom on ISO setting and reciprocal development, the common terms for placing your tonal zones where desired then developing according to the placement of the highlights; Zone 7 (white with texture). Zone 8 can't help be be blank white.
The overall tonal range of those two prints, "Skinner's Cabin" and "Bottle in the Window" were both shot at the proscribed ISO as rated on the film, then developed in a standard M/Q developer. Yes, D-76, then likely printed using Dektol. Most of us begin there. I have brought up W. Eugene Smith for his rich blacks within his shadowed images, as demonstration of shooting at the toe. What I was seeking was to see into those shadows, open them up and add detail, even texture. Eventually I figured it out.
I made two alterations to my shooting/developing routine, which in a sense would come under the general description of a compaction. Yeah, I know, weird. What it comes down to is simply increasing exposure, which of course 'peers' into the shadows, increasing detail. To compensate for the highlights which would be blown out with normal development, I altered another variable; the developer. I ceased using M/Q developers due to the superadditivity function, and began mixing my own developers using only Metol, semi-compensating high resolution developers. That shift in chemistry negated my needing to reduce development time to compensate for the increased exposure, as I found out about Beutler 105 early on, and with it's semi-compensating ability the highlights didn't get blown out.
The reason I know this first hand is because I did a number of texture tests using the developing formulas mentioned. The first time I saw the outcome of a texture test using Beutler, there was no turning back. After you drive a Ferrari, a Jetta just doesn't get it anymore. I was shooting roll film, both 35mm & 2 1/4", which was a major expense for me at the time so getting it right was important. One of the better decisions I made back then was to invest in a bulk film loader for the 35mm film. The 2 1/4" film came 12 shots to a roll so worked out well for a texture test run. Probably a good idea to add a Texture Test Procedure to the Procedures Pages of the blog for easy referral.
This is the image I used for the cover of my book on black and white film and photo chemistry, as it demonstrates this very shift in moving the contrast index (CI) towards the shoulder of the curve, thereby reducing shadow area. Two important aspects of this shift, obviously, is keeping a respectable Zone 1 dMax black, perhaps even a bit of Zone 2 in places, like covered areas. This image demonstrates that well. I have yet to be able to print this image in palladium as I plan on doing. I have been doing test prints in silver for best density range of the digital negative. With the current facilities not easily reached this process is lengthy and tedious. Once my printing room is finished such efforts will be straight forward, and rather delicious.
I am posting the image more enlarged for better view of the lack of shadows in the image. What remains of the lower tonal zones is Zone 1 mostly, with mostly middle tones, and Zone 6-7 predominant. For my tastes at the time those two zones represented the 'poured silver' look, which is what I as after. The developer would have been pyro/hydroxide.
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Footbridge in the Forest"
1984 ~ 8"x10" ~ Private Collection
Willamette Forest, Oregon
The overall tonal range of those two prints, "Skinner's Cabin" and "Bottle in the Window" were both shot at the proscribed ISO as rated on the film, then developed in a standard M/Q developer. Yes, D-76, then likely printed using Dektol. Most of us begin there. I have brought up W. Eugene Smith for his rich blacks within his shadowed images, as demonstration of shooting at the toe. What I was seeking was to see into those shadows, open them up and add detail, even texture. Eventually I figured it out.
I made two alterations to my shooting/developing routine, which in a sense would come under the general description of a compaction. Yeah, I know, weird. What it comes down to is simply increasing exposure, which of course 'peers' into the shadows, increasing detail. To compensate for the highlights which would be blown out with normal development, I altered another variable; the developer. I ceased using M/Q developers due to the superadditivity function, and began mixing my own developers using only Metol, semi-compensating high resolution developers. That shift in chemistry negated my needing to reduce development time to compensate for the increased exposure, as I found out about Beutler 105 early on, and with it's semi-compensating ability the highlights didn't get blown out.
The reason I know this first hand is because I did a number of texture tests using the developing formulas mentioned. The first time I saw the outcome of a texture test using Beutler, there was no turning back. After you drive a Ferrari, a Jetta just doesn't get it anymore. I was shooting roll film, both 35mm & 2 1/4", which was a major expense for me at the time so getting it right was important. One of the better decisions I made back then was to invest in a bulk film loader for the 35mm film. The 2 1/4" film came 12 shots to a roll so worked out well for a texture test run. Probably a good idea to add a Texture Test Procedure to the Procedures Pages of the blog for easy referral.
This is the image I used for the cover of my book on black and white film and photo chemistry, as it demonstrates this very shift in moving the contrast index (CI) towards the shoulder of the curve, thereby reducing shadow area. Two important aspects of this shift, obviously, is keeping a respectable Zone 1 dMax black, perhaps even a bit of Zone 2 in places, like covered areas. This image demonstrates that well. I have yet to be able to print this image in palladium as I plan on doing. I have been doing test prints in silver for best density range of the digital negative. With the current facilities not easily reached this process is lengthy and tedious. Once my printing room is finished such efforts will be straight forward, and rather delicious.
I am posting the image more enlarged for better view of the lack of shadows in the image. What remains of the lower tonal zones is Zone 1 mostly, with mostly middle tones, and Zone 6-7 predominant. For my tastes at the time those two zones represented the 'poured silver' look, which is what I as after. The developer would have been pyro/hydroxide.
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Footbridge in the Forest"
1984 ~ 8"x10" ~ Private Collection
Willamette Forest, Oregon
Experimenting with ISO settings
When I first began controlling the way my photographs looked when printed, it wasn't until I had begun mixing my own developers that I was able to do so with any predictability, and get what I wanted. Moving the ISO (ASA back then) up or down directly shaped the image. Something most of us do at one time or another. For me I took notice of this resultant effect looking at W. Eugene Smith images. Smith shot way down at the toe of the curve, and it would be my observation that this was a result of his lighting limitations at the time, being he was a photo journalist by vocation. You capture what you can in low light situations. What I have no knowledge of is his darkroom practices and procedures so really have no idea of his intentions or tastes.
Seeing Eugene Smith's photos like "Walk to Paradise" see the deep shadows into black with the subjects the lightest subjects in the image. Light subject on dark background was a stylistic technique for painters following Rembrandt. I was not one drawn to this style early on. I learned how to push the contrast index curve up to the shoulder, keeping highlights in textural range. For whatever reason, now I am more drawn to black and white images showing off the toe region.
Using my newly obtained Argoflex twin-lens camera I began earnestly capturing elements too delicious to get away. One being the replica of the original cabin of the historical discoverer of Eugene, Oregon, Eugene Skinner. It sits atop Skinner's butte just north of the town of Eugene. A very nice spot from which to capture local images.
Camera; Argoflex twin-lens Negative; Ilford FP-4 rated ISO 125 Developed in Beutler 105
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Skinner's Cabin"
1983 ~ 8"x10" ~ Private collection
Skinner's Butte ~ Eugene, Oregon
Seeing Eugene Smith's photos like "Walk to Paradise" see the deep shadows into black with the subjects the lightest subjects in the image. Light subject on dark background was a stylistic technique for painters following Rembrandt. I was not one drawn to this style early on. I learned how to push the contrast index curve up to the shoulder, keeping highlights in textural range. For whatever reason, now I am more drawn to black and white images showing off the toe region.
Using my newly obtained Argoflex twin-lens camera I began earnestly capturing elements too delicious to get away. One being the replica of the original cabin of the historical discoverer of Eugene, Oregon, Eugene Skinner. It sits atop Skinner's butte just north of the town of Eugene. A very nice spot from which to capture local images.
Camera; Argoflex twin-lens Negative; Ilford FP-4 rated ISO 125 Developed in Beutler 105
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Skinner's Cabin"
1983 ~ 8"x10" ~ Private collection
Skinner's Butte ~ Eugene, Oregon
Early Camera Fun ~ Capturing Light
Using that old Argoflex gave me endless enjoyment. There was just something about viewing a little screen below your eyes, with things moving in weird ways when you tried framing the shot. Come on, you know you sort of liked that. It was like mastering the steps in a Tango, done just right....
Interestingly enough, I tended to point the lens at subjects that seemed to me to capture light, and hold it, until the rays of light changed, before it was gone. Probably the first couple dozen rolls of film were shots of stuff in or around the house. I can almost hear... "yeah, me too." A bottle in the window, with a small spider web caught me eye while I was sitting at the table next to said window. It was the light captured in the sheer curtain that sort of connected the spider web with the bottle, all reflecting the light.
What I would like to propose is for any photographer who reaches this blog, is an open invitation to post an image of yours that fits within the context of the blog, which is pretty open to any black and white image, with emphasis on hand coated images. I will post them with whatever information you want included. An IT person I am not, so perhaps you can email me with said information, as do the authors who do so for my author's blogging. Not sure if my email shows up for contact on this site but here it is; gmhandgis@gmail.com
Silver Gel Print ~ "Bottle in the Window"
1981 ~ 8"x10 ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon
Interestingly enough, I tended to point the lens at subjects that seemed to me to capture light, and hold it, until the rays of light changed, before it was gone. Probably the first couple dozen rolls of film were shots of stuff in or around the house. I can almost hear... "yeah, me too." A bottle in the window, with a small spider web caught me eye while I was sitting at the table next to said window. It was the light captured in the sheer curtain that sort of connected the spider web with the bottle, all reflecting the light.
What I would like to propose is for any photographer who reaches this blog, is an open invitation to post an image of yours that fits within the context of the blog, which is pretty open to any black and white image, with emphasis on hand coated images. I will post them with whatever information you want included. An IT person I am not, so perhaps you can email me with said information, as do the authors who do so for my author's blogging. Not sure if my email shows up for contact on this site but here it is; gmhandgis@gmail.com
Silver Gel Print ~ "Bottle in the Window"
1981 ~ 8"x10 ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon
Thursday, August 25, 2016
Early Cameras ~ Early Photographs
One of the frustrations of blogging is not having discourse with those that are interested in the subject. The blogger talks to the viewer, hopefully engagingly enough to make it worth the viewer's time to actually return again. I have every confidence there are dozens of salty photographers out there with some beautiful images, out of the public's view. To those photographers, I would so much love to have a bi-directional exchange of knowledge and ideas. Perhaps that might be a future endeavor. As always, comments are welcomed, encouraged. The irritating part of that is the need to have to leave a comment through a menu of options to do so. Commenting should be direct and easy, not reliant upon another corporate connection for tracking and ad-controlling. But that's just me.
I am also going to bet that most of you photographers, seasoned and newly arrived, don't have the Cadillac budget that begets you everything you desire, hand over the money thank you. Some of the photographers I represented in my gallery at the time, wielded a Hasselblad, with Zeiss lenses. Yeah, plural. I was impressed anyway. Turned out to be a close friend, still is. Another interesting character carried a rather nice 8x10 view camera on a thousand dollar tripod. He was also a very good platinum printer using the negatives from that camera.
The point of that ramble was to say most of us begin with simple equipment and work our way up. I not only do not find any shame in that, but believe it actually is beneficial, as it forces the photographer to fully grasp the process to enhance the images taken. Things like soft lenses (cheap lenses) limitations of lens on hand, ability of the camera from available functions, etc. Case in point, one of my first cameras besides the Canon Qt film camera I bought for $40 at a used camera store, was an $18 Argoflex, which I have no doubt was made in the forties. If you Google that camera the images you will see are much more modern than the model I used. It did have aperture setting and shutter speed, as well as focus of course. It did all the basics, and was a twin-lens.
The larger film size made up for the soft thirty year old Argoflex lens. That was actually fairly thrilling to work with, as you likely know. Of all the differences between 35mm (SLR) shooting and a twin-lens, it is the looking down to shoot I appreciate the most. Anyone having used a twin-lens knows the image is backwards to the viewer. Once the eye/hand function works out that little trick the photographic view is awesome. No one knows what you are doing. From that very thought brings up an image that is for me, a personal favorite. One that has yet to be finalized, but is exemplary in the outcome of using a simple twin-lens camera in a public space. This one was a Renaissance Fair affair whereupon people were walking about in costume and period dress. How tantalizing is that?
I spotted a woman dressed as a Mime walking towards me, then stopping at a booth. I will confess to moving in closer, into a favorable lighting position for a shot, about six feet away. I do not consider that stalking, although technically.... I turned to face her, looked down and focused then turned away again. When she picked up the flute to play... I turned again, and when she turned her head just a bit, such that she couldn't be recognized I clicked the shutter. The only image I ever printed for this shot was in gum. Perhaps a print in palladium might work, but for me, the gum printing will be the only outlet. I do not make copies in gum. Any gum print will be unique.
For now this image is a work in progress. I made a test print some time ago, which is the very thing that brought me back into the active fold of printing again. The test was a success even though the print is not an exhibition quality print. It demonstrated to my liking the boundary for gum density to be used, as well as reaching a full dMax in the print with separated tonal values respectively. With that knowledge the next run will be as needed. I printed this image using the sun, hence the print time is iffy at best. The achievement is realizing a full tonal range (failed here) and, showing texture and detail, like the weave pattern of her sweater. It is likely I will crop the final image a bit to draw in the subject closer, eliminating the extraneous material on the top and right edge.
I leave this image larger than normal to show the crackling of the densest area of gum, which is the blacks. That was the demonstration of bum density boundary. The texture and detail of her sweater is what I want to preserve. This print is five color print layers. The overall image is also a bit dark, from the original layer printing, going to long. One of the vagaries of using the sun for printing. The final print will reach a dozen layers at least. Then it will be ready to exhibit live.
Gum Dichromate Print ~ "The Flute Player"
1983 ~ 8"x10 ~ Unique
Veneta, Oregon
I am also going to bet that most of you photographers, seasoned and newly arrived, don't have the Cadillac budget that begets you everything you desire, hand over the money thank you. Some of the photographers I represented in my gallery at the time, wielded a Hasselblad, with Zeiss lenses. Yeah, plural. I was impressed anyway. Turned out to be a close friend, still is. Another interesting character carried a rather nice 8x10 view camera on a thousand dollar tripod. He was also a very good platinum printer using the negatives from that camera.
The point of that ramble was to say most of us begin with simple equipment and work our way up. I not only do not find any shame in that, but believe it actually is beneficial, as it forces the photographer to fully grasp the process to enhance the images taken. Things like soft lenses (cheap lenses) limitations of lens on hand, ability of the camera from available functions, etc. Case in point, one of my first cameras besides the Canon Qt film camera I bought for $40 at a used camera store, was an $18 Argoflex, which I have no doubt was made in the forties. If you Google that camera the images you will see are much more modern than the model I used. It did have aperture setting and shutter speed, as well as focus of course. It did all the basics, and was a twin-lens.
The larger film size made up for the soft thirty year old Argoflex lens. That was actually fairly thrilling to work with, as you likely know. Of all the differences between 35mm (SLR) shooting and a twin-lens, it is the looking down to shoot I appreciate the most. Anyone having used a twin-lens knows the image is backwards to the viewer. Once the eye/hand function works out that little trick the photographic view is awesome. No one knows what you are doing. From that very thought brings up an image that is for me, a personal favorite. One that has yet to be finalized, but is exemplary in the outcome of using a simple twin-lens camera in a public space. This one was a Renaissance Fair affair whereupon people were walking about in costume and period dress. How tantalizing is that?
I spotted a woman dressed as a Mime walking towards me, then stopping at a booth. I will confess to moving in closer, into a favorable lighting position for a shot, about six feet away. I do not consider that stalking, although technically.... I turned to face her, looked down and focused then turned away again. When she picked up the flute to play... I turned again, and when she turned her head just a bit, such that she couldn't be recognized I clicked the shutter. The only image I ever printed for this shot was in gum. Perhaps a print in palladium might work, but for me, the gum printing will be the only outlet. I do not make copies in gum. Any gum print will be unique.
For now this image is a work in progress. I made a test print some time ago, which is the very thing that brought me back into the active fold of printing again. The test was a success even though the print is not an exhibition quality print. It demonstrated to my liking the boundary for gum density to be used, as well as reaching a full dMax in the print with separated tonal values respectively. With that knowledge the next run will be as needed. I printed this image using the sun, hence the print time is iffy at best. The achievement is realizing a full tonal range (failed here) and, showing texture and detail, like the weave pattern of her sweater. It is likely I will crop the final image a bit to draw in the subject closer, eliminating the extraneous material on the top and right edge.
I leave this image larger than normal to show the crackling of the densest area of gum, which is the blacks. That was the demonstration of bum density boundary. The texture and detail of her sweater is what I want to preserve. This print is five color print layers. The overall image is also a bit dark, from the original layer printing, going to long. One of the vagaries of using the sun for printing. The final print will reach a dozen layers at least. Then it will be ready to exhibit live.
Gum Dichromate Print ~ "The Flute Player"
1983 ~ 8"x10 ~ Unique
Veneta, Oregon
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
Open Call to all Photographers ~ Show Us Yours
I am offering an open invitation to any photographer who wishes to have one or more of their images posted on this site, especially if it is pertinent to the subjects being discussed, like personal approach to ISO setting/developing, or hand coated image you are proud of, or if it is usable technical or informational process or procedure. Ideally, this blog could be a forum of photographic expression and techniques. Could be.
I know view camera photographers are out there, and most of you have been around awhile. My intent is furthering the interest and discussion moving on all things black and white film photography, and related subjects therein. I love this craft and am seeing a resurgence in interest in learning it. There are likely even more film shooters of roll film cameras, which now isn't a hindrance for large negative printing now with Epson printers and suitable acetate sheets to print on.
I'm putting up one of my earliest images, using a very old $18 Argoflex twin-lens camera I was amazingly thrilled to have just scored. That called for a trip to the beach, right after a few rolls aiming the lens at all things around the house and yard. So I take you to the sand dunes of Florence, Oregon. The C5 lens adapter I used on this shot created the vignetting in the corners. Dodged out of the print. Not so lucky digitally after scanning the original negative, as I use Lightroom 4, and that clone tool is.... interesting.
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Dune Grasses"
1982 ~ 8"x10" ~ Unique Private Collection
Florence, Oregon
I know view camera photographers are out there, and most of you have been around awhile. My intent is furthering the interest and discussion moving on all things black and white film photography, and related subjects therein. I love this craft and am seeing a resurgence in interest in learning it. There are likely even more film shooters of roll film cameras, which now isn't a hindrance for large negative printing now with Epson printers and suitable acetate sheets to print on.
I'm putting up one of my earliest images, using a very old $18 Argoflex twin-lens camera I was amazingly thrilled to have just scored. That called for a trip to the beach, right after a few rolls aiming the lens at all things around the house and yard. So I take you to the sand dunes of Florence, Oregon. The C5 lens adapter I used on this shot created the vignetting in the corners. Dodged out of the print. Not so lucky digitally after scanning the original negative, as I use Lightroom 4, and that clone tool is.... interesting.
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Dune Grasses"
1982 ~ 8"x10" ~ Unique Private Collection
Florence, Oregon
Print Image ~ Portraiture Choices
I have written on photographers who's prints become a format, each image a mirror of another. I am not carping, nor attempting to denigrate the practice. It just isn't my style. I do not always want eight distinct tonal zones in each image, nor do I print in the same stylistic method, i.e. using the same developer & development time, paper, or even within one medium. I look at each image as having its own character, and feel. Sometimes that means constricting the tonal range to only show that range of tonality as to showcase the image in the "light" it was intended.
Anyone who has visited a museum, or if they are lucky enough, a gallery, that hangs platinum/palladium prints, will see that not many of them show a full range print from absolute black to blank white. I have pondered this too many times to mention, but I have seen hundreds of such Pt/Pd prints. What I took away from this is simple that the photographer developed these large negatives and printed them as they chose for their personal tastes. I do not second guess another photographer's choices. I merely attempt to understand their thinking, their artistic expression and accept it for what it is, not how I would make it different.
Each photographer has their own aesthetic sense of what their photographic images should look like, and it is this personal sense of image that makes each photographer unique. My thought for this is for each photographer to find this personal expression through the controls of their negatives & printing medium to be able to print the desired expression. Knowing the controls of the negative such that burning and dodging and 'photo fixes' are not needed. As many of you know, that is possible.
Whereas this photographer is working diligently to arrive at a point where I will be printing directly in platinum/palladium, arriving at a print that mimics the Pt/Pd was something I worked hard at those many years ago. The print below was an example of working towards a warmed toned print with the warm toned visual feel of a hand coated print. The image doesn't represent Zone 7 or Zone 8 in a major way. The portrait lighting was soft and subdued, from a single source, the only window in the room, some distance away. I liked that and replicated it in the image.
Century Graflex 6x9 Camera;
Negative; FP-4 (ISO rated 80) Developed Beutler 105 - 1:10 8-min
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Mark Pope"
1985 ~ 6"x9" ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon (his apartment)
Anyone who has visited a museum, or if they are lucky enough, a gallery, that hangs platinum/palladium prints, will see that not many of them show a full range print from absolute black to blank white. I have pondered this too many times to mention, but I have seen hundreds of such Pt/Pd prints. What I took away from this is simple that the photographer developed these large negatives and printed them as they chose for their personal tastes. I do not second guess another photographer's choices. I merely attempt to understand their thinking, their artistic expression and accept it for what it is, not how I would make it different.
Each photographer has their own aesthetic sense of what their photographic images should look like, and it is this personal sense of image that makes each photographer unique. My thought for this is for each photographer to find this personal expression through the controls of their negatives & printing medium to be able to print the desired expression. Knowing the controls of the negative such that burning and dodging and 'photo fixes' are not needed. As many of you know, that is possible.
Whereas this photographer is working diligently to arrive at a point where I will be printing directly in platinum/palladium, arriving at a print that mimics the Pt/Pd was something I worked hard at those many years ago. The print below was an example of working towards a warmed toned print with the warm toned visual feel of a hand coated print. The image doesn't represent Zone 7 or Zone 8 in a major way. The portrait lighting was soft and subdued, from a single source, the only window in the room, some distance away. I liked that and replicated it in the image.
Century Graflex 6x9 Camera;
Negative; FP-4 (ISO rated 80) Developed Beutler 105 - 1:10 8-min
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Mark Pope"
1985 ~ 6"x9" ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon (his apartment)
Gettng The Lens Close
I hung out with two other view camera photographers in the 80's, sharing many photo days together, each having our own view of the surroundings for pointing a lens. I tended to look for trees and rocks and water, old cabins or junk abandoned cars. Sometmes though I would get closer to the micro world when the light would make one object or another light up magically. Ed Vliek mastered shooting in very highly contrasty light, using it to create shapes in the sand dunes of Florence, Oregon. The shapes of the sand drifts in high contrast on bromide paper created wonderful abstract shapes.
One of the things that hindered my desire for getting in close to objects was because I only had cheap lenses for the view camera, soft lenses, which, at the time, made them less desirable as subjects. This leaf was one such object that caught my eye one fall. We had a female Maple tree in our front yard, where my two kids used as their adventure tree. One of the leaves had fallen and blown up to thef front porch, where it seemed appropriate for capturing an image. At the time I was using a Century Graflex 6cmx9cm view camera. Very nice camera. It captured this image.
Negative; Ilford HP-5 (rated 160) Developed; Pyro/Hydroxide
"Winter Leaf" Soon to be Palladium print
One of the things that hindered my desire for getting in close to objects was because I only had cheap lenses for the view camera, soft lenses, which, at the time, made them less desirable as subjects. This leaf was one such object that caught my eye one fall. We had a female Maple tree in our front yard, where my two kids used as their adventure tree. One of the leaves had fallen and blown up to thef front porch, where it seemed appropriate for capturing an image. At the time I was using a Century Graflex 6cmx9cm view camera. Very nice camera. It captured this image.
Negative; Ilford HP-5 (rated 160) Developed; Pyro/Hydroxide
"Winter Leaf" Soon to be Palladium print
Monday, August 22, 2016
Seeking the Right Printing Paper
For this discussion I am once again referring to hand coated processes, as I haven't touched a silver gelatin bromide or chloride paper in many years and can't say much about that subject. The printing papers for hand coated processes have their own characteristics that can influence the final print in striking ways, through the paper's color as well as its texture. The choice of printing paper is a personal, subjective thing, as the decision influences the look of the final print.
I never made a study of print paper types, substrata, sizing type, or no sizing, weight, texture, etc. There are many considerations to make, if you were to begin from scratch. There is a print paper that can be said to be the standard for hand coated photographic processes. Arches Platine paper. It was the first paper made specifically for platinum printing. I don't believe it gets any better than that. It is a smooth finish paper about a 90lb weight made of 100% rag. I can say that I have used this paper and pretty much find it as the paper to use. One caveat for me is that to my eye, it doesn't seem to be a pure white color, but more of a soft eggshell color. Perhaps it is my eye.
The first paper I worked with printing in silver was Canson, in both the classical white and the softer eggshell color, which brings a warm toned look to the print, which might otherwise be more neutral black and white. I chose that paper because of the textural finish, which was sort of a raised looking crosshatch pattern, showing through the silver print just enough that it was obvious the print was hand coated. That was just my subjective choice at that time. I continue to print on that paper for some work. One of the qualities I like about this paper is that it is of lessor weight. It feels more like 70lb weight, and it doesn't absorb the silver layers as deeply as a heavier weighted paper might, especially if that paper has no sizing.
Another paper that I have found to be a good paper for printing in silver is a good hot pack watercolor paper of a 90lb weight. The hot pack papers are smoother finish and some have a sizing, as well as being 100% rag paper. Cold pack papers have a rough surface and I found them unsuitable for printing unless used for some specific reason, which I have yet fathomed. Canson paper will be the cheapest of the lot, although they sheets come in 19"x21" or something close to that, which isn't all that conducive to 8"x10" prints, as you only get four sheets from the cuts, either way.
One method of buying printing paper, if you choose Arches Platine, is buying it bulk from Bostick & Sullivan. Locally, retail for a sheet of Platine is $12.95. I do get six sheets out of it, but still. The same sheets of Platine in a package of (25) sheets is around $130, or about $5.60/sheet. That will be my choice when I finally get my printing room up and running and printing begins in earnest.
Another heads up for those that begin to feel the itch to try out hand coating their prints, using enlarged digital negatives, printing frames are available at Photographers' Formulary for under $60, 8x10, 11x14, 16x20, 20x24, same price. I am currently locating parts necessary to build the UV printing box I will be building, using 24" florescent (T12) 20W UV tubes. For that box 8 bulbs will cover 20", 1 1/2" tubes spaces 3/4" apart (between tubes), one ballast per 2 tubes. When I have that together I will be documenting the procedure for posting. Every encouragement helps.
I chose Canson White paper for this image. At the time I liked the surface pattern, a sort of crosshatch softly raised tooth, which just showed through the finished, subtly. It was pleasing to my eye, and that would be the question to ask when choosing your paper. I had reached the proper density range for the salted paper print's correspondingly long tonal range potential. This is a digital scan of a copy slide of the original. Things get lost in translation, especially for me.
Negative; FP-4 (ISO 125 rated 80) Pyro/Hydroxide
Salted Silver Print ~ "Overlook Cougar Reservoir"
1986 ~ 5"x7" ~ Unique
Oregon Mountains
I never made a study of print paper types, substrata, sizing type, or no sizing, weight, texture, etc. There are many considerations to make, if you were to begin from scratch. There is a print paper that can be said to be the standard for hand coated photographic processes. Arches Platine paper. It was the first paper made specifically for platinum printing. I don't believe it gets any better than that. It is a smooth finish paper about a 90lb weight made of 100% rag. I can say that I have used this paper and pretty much find it as the paper to use. One caveat for me is that to my eye, it doesn't seem to be a pure white color, but more of a soft eggshell color. Perhaps it is my eye.
The first paper I worked with printing in silver was Canson, in both the classical white and the softer eggshell color, which brings a warm toned look to the print, which might otherwise be more neutral black and white. I chose that paper because of the textural finish, which was sort of a raised looking crosshatch pattern, showing through the silver print just enough that it was obvious the print was hand coated. That was just my subjective choice at that time. I continue to print on that paper for some work. One of the qualities I like about this paper is that it is of lessor weight. It feels more like 70lb weight, and it doesn't absorb the silver layers as deeply as a heavier weighted paper might, especially if that paper has no sizing.
Another paper that I have found to be a good paper for printing in silver is a good hot pack watercolor paper of a 90lb weight. The hot pack papers are smoother finish and some have a sizing, as well as being 100% rag paper. Cold pack papers have a rough surface and I found them unsuitable for printing unless used for some specific reason, which I have yet fathomed. Canson paper will be the cheapest of the lot, although they sheets come in 19"x21" or something close to that, which isn't all that conducive to 8"x10" prints, as you only get four sheets from the cuts, either way.
One method of buying printing paper, if you choose Arches Platine, is buying it bulk from Bostick & Sullivan. Locally, retail for a sheet of Platine is $12.95. I do get six sheets out of it, but still. The same sheets of Platine in a package of (25) sheets is around $130, or about $5.60/sheet. That will be my choice when I finally get my printing room up and running and printing begins in earnest.
Another heads up for those that begin to feel the itch to try out hand coating their prints, using enlarged digital negatives, printing frames are available at Photographers' Formulary for under $60, 8x10, 11x14, 16x20, 20x24, same price. I am currently locating parts necessary to build the UV printing box I will be building, using 24" florescent (T12) 20W UV tubes. For that box 8 bulbs will cover 20", 1 1/2" tubes spaces 3/4" apart (between tubes), one ballast per 2 tubes. When I have that together I will be documenting the procedure for posting. Every encouragement helps.
I chose Canson White paper for this image. At the time I liked the surface pattern, a sort of crosshatch softly raised tooth, which just showed through the finished, subtly. It was pleasing to my eye, and that would be the question to ask when choosing your paper. I had reached the proper density range for the salted paper print's correspondingly long tonal range potential. This is a digital scan of a copy slide of the original. Things get lost in translation, especially for me.
Negative; FP-4 (ISO 125 rated 80) Pyro/Hydroxide
Salted Silver Print ~ "Overlook Cougar Reservoir"
1986 ~ 5"x7" ~ Unique
Oregon Mountains
More on the Test Slides for sheet film testing
I was asked to clarify the diamond patterns on the dark slides when doing the towel test for the film being used. The diamond shape is the one I happened to use as it was the easiest to cut out. Any other shape can be used, such as square, circle or any other. Just remember you have to cut that shape out six times. The size of the cutout can also be enlarged as well. I used that size/shape as it was sufficient for taking a reading from a simple (cheap) densitometer I had at the time. I just wanted to have the densities to see (put up to a light source) and measure to see where the first texture density fell in the frames, and, the second texture density, to see if they were four stops apart.
Densities double each step for the most part. It is when they do not that close attention to said developer or developing time to know why that is, before correcting it. Using the six slides, allows for eight density patterns on one sheet of film. Minimum film and developer use, as well as time. What you are looking for in the densities is when texture first begins to show up. If the film is shot at its posted ISO rating the first density image you see, the thinnest representing pure black in the print, then two frames up from that should show some texture (Zone 3 ~ shadows with detail) then four frames up from that you should see white with texture (Zone 7 ~ white with texture) and the final frame should be pure white.
The only thing that will alter frame one, is to alter the ISO before shooting. If the final frame, pure white, isn't, it calls for more time in the developer, (or less dilution). If the pure white is at frame seven, then the development is too long, (or not diluted enough). This test shows you exactly what your finished prints will look like in tonal scale, on the paper/medium and developer being used. When you change paper, medium, or developer, said original test is no longer valid. It must be done again for each new combination of lens, developer, paper/medium used. Many photographers glaze over when thinking about this, but once you do the first test you realize it isn't difficult at all.
This testing procedure is the baseline for the task of 'pre-visualization", as concept I will bring up once again. Pre-visualization is simply knowing your camera equipment, film, metering and development (after film test) before you click the shutter. You know exactly what you are going to get when you meter for Zone 3 (shadows with detail) or Zone 7 (white with texture). All other densities will fall into place, with exception to one; Zone 8, which is totally controlled by development time. For the vast majority of cases, if Zone 7 (frame 7) is white, with detail, then Zone 8 will be pure white, as intended for a 'full range' black and white image. Full range representing eight distinct tonal ranges from pure black to pure white.
Another reason to know your density ranges is simple because there will be times when you do not want a full tonal range image, for numerous reasons. Controlling for exactly the tonal range you want, before shooting, is based upon the texture testing. Without that you are merely guessing.
Below is an attempt to show what a finished sheet of cut film might look like after the texture test. The cut sheets with diamond cuts are actually set up to make ten density samples, although only eight are actually needed. The final to density ranges will tell you something about your developer though. I used ten when doing the testing. By using them in the order they are shown, then flipping over the first four sheets, ten samples can be taken, or you can stop at eight.
Cut film after texture text; shown are ten densities on one sheet of film using the dark slides as shown.
The increased density of each density sample on the sheet film can be seen. I have said earlier that there eight densities for the test, which can be done as well. The full ten shots don't take much more time to do but it does give you a good look at how your developer acts with the top densities, which can tell you something about what an expansion might look like in densities. What you are looking for is the two density ranges indicated with an arrow. Those are the two tonal ranges that matter when testing for densities, as well as the final density; zone 8. It should be pure white frame #8.
Densities double each step for the most part. It is when they do not that close attention to said developer or developing time to know why that is, before correcting it. Using the six slides, allows for eight density patterns on one sheet of film. Minimum film and developer use, as well as time. What you are looking for in the densities is when texture first begins to show up. If the film is shot at its posted ISO rating the first density image you see, the thinnest representing pure black in the print, then two frames up from that should show some texture (Zone 3 ~ shadows with detail) then four frames up from that you should see white with texture (Zone 7 ~ white with texture) and the final frame should be pure white.
The only thing that will alter frame one, is to alter the ISO before shooting. If the final frame, pure white, isn't, it calls for more time in the developer, (or less dilution). If the pure white is at frame seven, then the development is too long, (or not diluted enough). This test shows you exactly what your finished prints will look like in tonal scale, on the paper/medium and developer being used. When you change paper, medium, or developer, said original test is no longer valid. It must be done again for each new combination of lens, developer, paper/medium used. Many photographers glaze over when thinking about this, but once you do the first test you realize it isn't difficult at all.
This testing procedure is the baseline for the task of 'pre-visualization", as concept I will bring up once again. Pre-visualization is simply knowing your camera equipment, film, metering and development (after film test) before you click the shutter. You know exactly what you are going to get when you meter for Zone 3 (shadows with detail) or Zone 7 (white with texture). All other densities will fall into place, with exception to one; Zone 8, which is totally controlled by development time. For the vast majority of cases, if Zone 7 (frame 7) is white, with detail, then Zone 8 will be pure white, as intended for a 'full range' black and white image. Full range representing eight distinct tonal ranges from pure black to pure white.
Another reason to know your density ranges is simple because there will be times when you do not want a full tonal range image, for numerous reasons. Controlling for exactly the tonal range you want, before shooting, is based upon the texture testing. Without that you are merely guessing.
Below is an attempt to show what a finished sheet of cut film might look like after the texture test. The cut sheets with diamond cuts are actually set up to make ten density samples, although only eight are actually needed. The final to density ranges will tell you something about your developer though. I used ten when doing the testing. By using them in the order they are shown, then flipping over the first four sheets, ten samples can be taken, or you can stop at eight.
Cut film after texture text; shown are ten densities on one sheet of film using the dark slides as shown.
The increased density of each density sample on the sheet film can be seen. I have said earlier that there eight densities for the test, which can be done as well. The full ten shots don't take much more time to do but it does give you a good look at how your developer acts with the top densities, which can tell you something about what an expansion might look like in densities. What you are looking for is the two density ranges indicated with an arrow. Those are the two tonal ranges that matter when testing for densities, as well as the final density; zone 8. It should be pure white frame #8.
Testing for Negative Densities ~ The Towel Test
Black and White photography is very malleable as a process, and can be formulated to fit any photographer's preference for the visual outcome. W. Eugene Smith tended to shoot at the very toe of the curve, hence his images have that dramatic lighting with lots of shadow and deep blacks. Imogen Cunningham on the other hand tended to shoot closer to the shoulder of the curve, showing lots of middle tones and texture. I was of that brand of shooting at the shoulder.
To know exactly where you fall along that possible curve, it is necessary to test the negative you are using, with the developer that you use, as well as the developing time. There is a simple way of doing that. My method was to take a white bath towel, the more texture the better, then following the course below;
Place white towel in north light, evenly lit all over the area you will be shooting. Easiest way is set up the camera on a tripod for consistent results. Center your shot in the middle of the illuminated towel area and focus on that spot. Meter that spot. All metering returns Zone 5 (middle gray ~ 18% reflective). Take that meter reading and stop down four stops. That represents Zone 1. Take a shot, open up one stop, shoot again, open up another stop and shoot again. If you can take ten shots that's good. Depending on the lens and how many stops it makes, you may have to also use the shutter speed for a stop or two to arrive at ten stops. If you do this, begin with the shutter speed setting as stops. The shutter speed is less accurate than aperture settings so when used first Zone 1-3 won't be as affected as using shutter speed at the upper densities. Take ten shots of the towel, then develope.
That first test will show you standard developing time, because you will be developing this test roll or sheet film with a particular developer, for the standard developing time. What you are looking for is the first time that the towel's texture begins to show up in the densities. That frame would be Zone 3, the first frame where the shadow detail begins to show texture. If you count down two frames, that will give you Zone 1, or deep black; DMax. If you can then count up (denser) four stops from that Zone 3 frame, and that frame shows texture in white, that will be Zone 7 (white with texture). One more should come out blank white, and that would be Zone 8. The development time will be affecting those final three upper tonal zones; Zone 6, 7, and 8. It will be those three upper densities that will show you if you need to develop less or more, to arrive at the correct densities of those tonal ranges. If the frame above the white texture range (Zone 7) is not fully blank white, add time to the development. If the Zone 7 range has not texture and is blank white, less time is needed. If the first frame at the bottom is not pure black, or there is a frame before the one that is pure black, your metering is off or you will want to reset your ISO, as shooting controls the shadow detail (Zone 3), and the development controls the highlights, above Zone 5.
Best way to do this is using a bulk film loader to roll ten or twelve frame rolls for testing puroses so you don't waste film. For sheet film use, for those using a view camera, there is a way to do this test using one sheet of film. See below;
Sheet Film Testing;
I found a thin black flexible fiber material that was inexpensive, and easy to cut to fit in the cut film holder, as well as cut diamond shapes out of it for the testing. I used a simple Exacto knife to do the cutting. You need six cut slides as shown with diamond, or other shape cut out for the testing. The numbering keeps them in order, and after the first six shots, the first two are flipped over and used for the final shots, making up the bottom line. You get eight shots from these six slides. I cut them then tape the top edge with slide number to keep track of the order. You end up with one sheet film with eight diamond shaped densities that can then be contact printed onto the medium you will be printing in, using the developer used in the test. I would strongly urge two more test be run, for the expansion and compaction development options.
To know exactly where you fall along that possible curve, it is necessary to test the negative you are using, with the developer that you use, as well as the developing time. There is a simple way of doing that. My method was to take a white bath towel, the more texture the better, then following the course below;
Place white towel in north light, evenly lit all over the area you will be shooting. Easiest way is set up the camera on a tripod for consistent results. Center your shot in the middle of the illuminated towel area and focus on that spot. Meter that spot. All metering returns Zone 5 (middle gray ~ 18% reflective). Take that meter reading and stop down four stops. That represents Zone 1. Take a shot, open up one stop, shoot again, open up another stop and shoot again. If you can take ten shots that's good. Depending on the lens and how many stops it makes, you may have to also use the shutter speed for a stop or two to arrive at ten stops. If you do this, begin with the shutter speed setting as stops. The shutter speed is less accurate than aperture settings so when used first Zone 1-3 won't be as affected as using shutter speed at the upper densities. Take ten shots of the towel, then develope.
That first test will show you standard developing time, because you will be developing this test roll or sheet film with a particular developer, for the standard developing time. What you are looking for is the first time that the towel's texture begins to show up in the densities. That frame would be Zone 3, the first frame where the shadow detail begins to show texture. If you count down two frames, that will give you Zone 1, or deep black; DMax. If you can then count up (denser) four stops from that Zone 3 frame, and that frame shows texture in white, that will be Zone 7 (white with texture). One more should come out blank white, and that would be Zone 8. The development time will be affecting those final three upper tonal zones; Zone 6, 7, and 8. It will be those three upper densities that will show you if you need to develop less or more, to arrive at the correct densities of those tonal ranges. If the frame above the white texture range (Zone 7) is not fully blank white, add time to the development. If the Zone 7 range has not texture and is blank white, less time is needed. If the first frame at the bottom is not pure black, or there is a frame before the one that is pure black, your metering is off or you will want to reset your ISO, as shooting controls the shadow detail (Zone 3), and the development controls the highlights, above Zone 5.
Best way to do this is using a bulk film loader to roll ten or twelve frame rolls for testing puroses so you don't waste film. For sheet film use, for those using a view camera, there is a way to do this test using one sheet of film. See below;
Sheet Film Testing;
I found a thin black flexible fiber material that was inexpensive, and easy to cut to fit in the cut film holder, as well as cut diamond shapes out of it for the testing. I used a simple Exacto knife to do the cutting. You need six cut slides as shown with diamond, or other shape cut out for the testing. The numbering keeps them in order, and after the first six shots, the first two are flipped over and used for the final shots, making up the bottom line. You get eight shots from these six slides. I cut them then tape the top edge with slide number to keep track of the order. You end up with one sheet film with eight diamond shaped densities that can then be contact printed onto the medium you will be printing in, using the developer used in the test. I would strongly urge two more test be run, for the expansion and compaction development options.
Sunday, August 21, 2016
Sunday Post of Thanks
My message today is simple. My thanks for the visitors to this blog. I have been blogging on writing and POD publishing for over six years. I was able to get eight books into publication under my brand; Brother Coyote Publications. What I have come to find after those years of writing umpteen articles on that subject, there are blessedly few visitors. One writes such fare for love, not fame or fortune, that's for sure.
I began this blog about a month ago because after thirty years since I was able to print my photographs, the opportunity arose to do so again. I did not hesitate. A very nice gentleman named PJ McArdle invited me into a small group of black and white photographers who share a darkroom he runs in a beautifully old Adobe house in the most western end of the Barrio, Tucson, AZ. PJ became very interested in hand coated processes when I told him of my personal interest in printing. We began with gum printing. I showed him the process, and secret, to multiple layer printing in gum. There is a key element to that process, without which, a fully printed gum is simple not possible. If you dot not believe me, do an internet search on gum prints or gum printers, look at the prints, and how many are offered. You will see the same gum printing as was done when Edward Steichen was printing them. I am not magic or a genius. I was fortunate early on when I began printing gums that I focused on this one critical element of printing that allowed the multiple layered printing. We're talking years to fully figure this out.
I will be writing mostly on hand coated printing processes as that is my love and the focus of this blog. Under that umbrella of printing the focus will be on the negative being used for said printing, as controlling the negative densities for the printing medium used is the goal. The print images I have been posting were mostly all printed thirty years ago. I keep referring to a printing room that is soon coming, after I pay my dues to the old contractor friend who will be making it happen, after I perform my duties as second mechanic, pit crew and chase driver on the Bonneville Salt Flats. Again. The blown out leathers at Speed Week changed everything.... Damn! I will have fresh 8x10 palladium toned silver prints, as well as new gum prints to show soon thereafter. Perhaps before.
So, thank you for visiting my blog. I work hard to make it worthwhile for photographers interested in expanding their photographic horizons, as well as showcasing black and white photography, keeping that energy alive and fresh. There is a resurgence in black and white film photography, for good reason. It never becomes "outdated" or "stale" unless photographers allow it to be so. Here is how I would frame the condition of photography today. Ask yourself this; how many 'photographers' are there today? How many print their own work? How many print silver gelatin, or digitally? Now, how many photographers print in hand coated processes? Of them, how many print gums? The numbers continue to dwindle as the questions proceed, and by the last question the number of printers can be counted on your fingers. Of those.... how many can print a thirteen color layer gum print? That is where we are going here. How do you do that.
I am of the old school of photography, or what I used to refer to as "Straight Photography", which happened to be the name of my first photography business, opened in Eugene in 1982. Two years later I opened a fine art gallery for black and white photographers. Photography is my first love. Writing hangs off that somewhere just behind. I believe it is up to the old timers of black and white photography to pass along their knowledge to those who come after, keeping the tradition alive and prospering, in a world of digital technology. Not that I have anything against digital photography. I am just really bad at it, then there's the red/green color blindness thingy.....
It is Sunday so I leave some snaps from Bonneville, and the Penguin that showed up....
Just showed up one morning....
The racer I crew for.... aka MPH Racing;
Long story....
Checking out the race vehicles in the starting line....
Really liked the Diesel V-16....
Really like that V-16...
Makes friends easily enough.... although wasn't allowed to actually send the racers off the line. . . not that it wasn't tried. . .
I began this blog about a month ago because after thirty years since I was able to print my photographs, the opportunity arose to do so again. I did not hesitate. A very nice gentleman named PJ McArdle invited me into a small group of black and white photographers who share a darkroom he runs in a beautifully old Adobe house in the most western end of the Barrio, Tucson, AZ. PJ became very interested in hand coated processes when I told him of my personal interest in printing. We began with gum printing. I showed him the process, and secret, to multiple layer printing in gum. There is a key element to that process, without which, a fully printed gum is simple not possible. If you dot not believe me, do an internet search on gum prints or gum printers, look at the prints, and how many are offered. You will see the same gum printing as was done when Edward Steichen was printing them. I am not magic or a genius. I was fortunate early on when I began printing gums that I focused on this one critical element of printing that allowed the multiple layered printing. We're talking years to fully figure this out.
I will be writing mostly on hand coated printing processes as that is my love and the focus of this blog. Under that umbrella of printing the focus will be on the negative being used for said printing, as controlling the negative densities for the printing medium used is the goal. The print images I have been posting were mostly all printed thirty years ago. I keep referring to a printing room that is soon coming, after I pay my dues to the old contractor friend who will be making it happen, after I perform my duties as second mechanic, pit crew and chase driver on the Bonneville Salt Flats. Again. The blown out leathers at Speed Week changed everything.... Damn! I will have fresh 8x10 palladium toned silver prints, as well as new gum prints to show soon thereafter. Perhaps before.
So, thank you for visiting my blog. I work hard to make it worthwhile for photographers interested in expanding their photographic horizons, as well as showcasing black and white photography, keeping that energy alive and fresh. There is a resurgence in black and white film photography, for good reason. It never becomes "outdated" or "stale" unless photographers allow it to be so. Here is how I would frame the condition of photography today. Ask yourself this; how many 'photographers' are there today? How many print their own work? How many print silver gelatin, or digitally? Now, how many photographers print in hand coated processes? Of them, how many print gums? The numbers continue to dwindle as the questions proceed, and by the last question the number of printers can be counted on your fingers. Of those.... how many can print a thirteen color layer gum print? That is where we are going here. How do you do that.
I am of the old school of photography, or what I used to refer to as "Straight Photography", which happened to be the name of my first photography business, opened in Eugene in 1982. Two years later I opened a fine art gallery for black and white photographers. Photography is my first love. Writing hangs off that somewhere just behind. I believe it is up to the old timers of black and white photography to pass along their knowledge to those who come after, keeping the tradition alive and prospering, in a world of digital technology. Not that I have anything against digital photography. I am just really bad at it, then there's the red/green color blindness thingy.....
It is Sunday so I leave some snaps from Bonneville, and the Penguin that showed up....
Just showed up one morning....
The racer I crew for.... aka MPH Racing;
Long story....
Checking out the race vehicles in the starting line....
Really liked the Diesel V-16....
Really like that V-16...
Makes friends easily enough.... although wasn't allowed to actually send the racers off the line. . . not that it wasn't tried. . .
Saturday, August 20, 2016
Time & Dilution ~ Controlling the Density Range (CI)
Having now seen the Contrast Index Curve, with the reciprocal densities along the curve line demonstrates how the curve conforms to the given densities. For many, another Duh moment. That curve is the outcome of development. The theme for this article is how to control those densities, and their range. This of course is done in development, which you already know if you develop your own negatives. It is important to know there is a considerable distinction between an M/Q developer and non-M/Q developers.
An M/Q developer is one with two reducing agents (developers). The standard M/Q developer over the past 100 years has been Metol & Hydroquinone, and when combined, bring about what is referred to as 'superadditivity'; the Gestalt effect of the result being more than the sum of its parts. Superadditivity derives from the characteristics of each reducing agent. Metol is a slower acting reducer with a fairly long developing life, whereas hydroquinone is more energetic but loses steam in short order when used alone, respectively. When added together, they create the superadditivity by combining their mutual assets, creating a energetic and long lasting developer. Probably the most used of these developers using Metol/Hydroquinone is Kodak's D76 (negatives) & Dectol (prints).
My argument against using any M/Q developer today is simple. It isn't needed with modern films for the vast majority of developing needs. The superadditivity element can be mimicked by dilution control using a Metol only formula. By controlling the developing through dilution allows for consideration to the choice of either a very energetic development (superadditivity) or semi-compensating development, when highlight control is needed for contrasty lighting conditions. This is important.
My argument only works of course, with mixing your own developers, not pre-packaged developers. The hydroquinone is already in those developers. I cannot repeat enough times that mixing your own developers, and fixer, is not only simple but very cost effective. Recent price analysis of current chemical pricing shows that an outlay of $50 (give or take) buys enough chemicals to develop negatives for six months to a year, depending on how aggressive a shooter one is. Mixing is as simple as pouring the pre-mix into a vessel of water. The Bisquick analogy is fitting here, as it is made up of three dry ingredients, as a developer is. It does require a cheap gram scale. I bought my digital scale for $17.50 online and it gets down to a tenth of a gram. Trust me on this issue. Visit Bostick & Sullivan or Photographer's Formulary and look up the prices for the chemicals I will be listing below.
There are two formulas I used for years that covered every need for developing negatives. Both are Metol only formulas, and both can be used in various dilutions for very good results. Beutler 105 is considered a semi-compensating developer, meaning it can hold in the detail in bright highlights, much like pyrocatachen, which is a fully compensating developer. The second developer is D23, considered to be a fine grain developer. Formulas below;
Beutler 105;
Water (@110 deg) 750 ml
Metol 5 g
Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous) 25 g
Sodium Carbonate (anhydrous) 25 g
Water ~ t/m 1000 ml
Use: 1:10 {ISO 125 ~ 8 min} {ISO 400 ~ 10 min}
D23;
Water (@110 deg) 750 ml
Metol 7.5 g
Sodium Sulfite 100 g
Water ~ t/m 1000 ml
Use: Undiluted (normal) {ISO 125 ~ 8 min} {ISO 400 ~ 8-10 min}
The above formulas are in their original form, and both will work well, however, both can be altered by dilution that can accommodate almost every need. The D23 formula is an offshoot of the Beutler formula. When increasing the sodium sulfite by that degree, it becomes a sort of reducing agent, as well as the preservative, which is its normal function. By eliminating the sodium carbonate makes it a better fine grain developer, although Beutler is also a fine grain developer.
By diluting D23 further; 1:1 or 1:2, which I have done, brings this developer more into the semi-compensating arena. I saved a severely overexposed negative by diluting D23 to 1:10, developing for over 20 minutes. I will be digging that negative out at some point to demonstrate how that came about. With Beutler, the dilution goes the other way; using it at 1:7 or 1:5 for more energetic development. The 1:5 mixture would be what we call "hot". That would be the route to negatives of the Log E 1.2 to 1.8 needed for hand coated printing in silver and platinum/palladium. Gum prints are a different matter and that will be another article to cover that.
Here is how the Contrast Index curve is affected by dilution. The example shows the Beutler
formula in three dilutions; 1:10 (bottom curve) 1:7 (middle curve) 1:5 (top curve)
As can be seen, the more dilution of Beutler the lower the contrast index curve. The most energetic curve is from the 1:5 dilution which is double strength of the original dilution of 1:10. For most of my salted silver images of the original portfolio I used Beutler at the 1:10 dilution, developing 20 minutes to reach a density range of Log E 1.2. I would have been better served altering that relationship to 1:7 for 15 min or possibly 1:5 for 12 or so minutes. I had not reached the evolution of that printing to have branched out with the testing for these two variables. I will be though.
Back to the two variables for development; Time & Formula Dilution. With dilution, the compensating quality of these two formulas decreases. Which is exactly why texture tests are so important. There is a very simple means of testing any given formula, with a specific lens (this is important) using a white bath towel. That would make a useful article, as this can be easily done with roll film as well as for sheet film.
The negative for the image below was developed in Pyrocatechin/Hydroxide formula. I have not brought this up yet. This is a fabulous formula, but care must be taken when using hydroxide as it is the most volatile of all photo-chemicals. A gram of it in a 1000 ml beacon of water will make the water boil. Hence due care is highly recommended. What the pyro/hydroxide formula offers is the highest acutance that can be obtained. Hydroxide provides that, as an accelerator. The emulsion side of the negative feels like a Bas Relief when you run your finger over the emulsion image. What is missing here is the original textural quality of a salted silver print. My attempts at scanning and digital manipulation for posting images basically sucks, on top of the red/green deficiency. My apologies.
Salted Silver Print ~ "Jerome House"
1986 ~ 5"x7" ~ Unique
Jerome, Arizona
An M/Q developer is one with two reducing agents (developers). The standard M/Q developer over the past 100 years has been Metol & Hydroquinone, and when combined, bring about what is referred to as 'superadditivity'; the Gestalt effect of the result being more than the sum of its parts. Superadditivity derives from the characteristics of each reducing agent. Metol is a slower acting reducer with a fairly long developing life, whereas hydroquinone is more energetic but loses steam in short order when used alone, respectively. When added together, they create the superadditivity by combining their mutual assets, creating a energetic and long lasting developer. Probably the most used of these developers using Metol/Hydroquinone is Kodak's D76 (negatives) & Dectol (prints).
My argument against using any M/Q developer today is simple. It isn't needed with modern films for the vast majority of developing needs. The superadditivity element can be mimicked by dilution control using a Metol only formula. By controlling the developing through dilution allows for consideration to the choice of either a very energetic development (superadditivity) or semi-compensating development, when highlight control is needed for contrasty lighting conditions. This is important.
My argument only works of course, with mixing your own developers, not pre-packaged developers. The hydroquinone is already in those developers. I cannot repeat enough times that mixing your own developers, and fixer, is not only simple but very cost effective. Recent price analysis of current chemical pricing shows that an outlay of $50 (give or take) buys enough chemicals to develop negatives for six months to a year, depending on how aggressive a shooter one is. Mixing is as simple as pouring the pre-mix into a vessel of water. The Bisquick analogy is fitting here, as it is made up of three dry ingredients, as a developer is. It does require a cheap gram scale. I bought my digital scale for $17.50 online and it gets down to a tenth of a gram. Trust me on this issue. Visit Bostick & Sullivan or Photographer's Formulary and look up the prices for the chemicals I will be listing below.
There are two formulas I used for years that covered every need for developing negatives. Both are Metol only formulas, and both can be used in various dilutions for very good results. Beutler 105 is considered a semi-compensating developer, meaning it can hold in the detail in bright highlights, much like pyrocatachen, which is a fully compensating developer. The second developer is D23, considered to be a fine grain developer. Formulas below;
Beutler 105;
Water (@110 deg) 750 ml
Metol 5 g
Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous) 25 g
Sodium Carbonate (anhydrous) 25 g
Water ~ t/m 1000 ml
Use: 1:10 {ISO 125 ~ 8 min} {ISO 400 ~ 10 min}
D23;
Water (@110 deg) 750 ml
Metol 7.5 g
Sodium Sulfite 100 g
Water ~ t/m 1000 ml
Use: Undiluted (normal) {ISO 125 ~ 8 min} {ISO 400 ~ 8-10 min}
The above formulas are in their original form, and both will work well, however, both can be altered by dilution that can accommodate almost every need. The D23 formula is an offshoot of the Beutler formula. When increasing the sodium sulfite by that degree, it becomes a sort of reducing agent, as well as the preservative, which is its normal function. By eliminating the sodium carbonate makes it a better fine grain developer, although Beutler is also a fine grain developer.
By diluting D23 further; 1:1 or 1:2, which I have done, brings this developer more into the semi-compensating arena. I saved a severely overexposed negative by diluting D23 to 1:10, developing for over 20 minutes. I will be digging that negative out at some point to demonstrate how that came about. With Beutler, the dilution goes the other way; using it at 1:7 or 1:5 for more energetic development. The 1:5 mixture would be what we call "hot". That would be the route to negatives of the Log E 1.2 to 1.8 needed for hand coated printing in silver and platinum/palladium. Gum prints are a different matter and that will be another article to cover that.
Here is how the Contrast Index curve is affected by dilution. The example shows the Beutler
formula in three dilutions; 1:10 (bottom curve) 1:7 (middle curve) 1:5 (top curve)
As can be seen, the more dilution of Beutler the lower the contrast index curve. The most energetic curve is from the 1:5 dilution which is double strength of the original dilution of 1:10. For most of my salted silver images of the original portfolio I used Beutler at the 1:10 dilution, developing 20 minutes to reach a density range of Log E 1.2. I would have been better served altering that relationship to 1:7 for 15 min or possibly 1:5 for 12 or so minutes. I had not reached the evolution of that printing to have branched out with the testing for these two variables. I will be though.
Back to the two variables for development; Time & Formula Dilution. With dilution, the compensating quality of these two formulas decreases. Which is exactly why texture tests are so important. There is a very simple means of testing any given formula, with a specific lens (this is important) using a white bath towel. That would make a useful article, as this can be easily done with roll film as well as for sheet film.
The negative for the image below was developed in Pyrocatechin/Hydroxide formula. I have not brought this up yet. This is a fabulous formula, but care must be taken when using hydroxide as it is the most volatile of all photo-chemicals. A gram of it in a 1000 ml beacon of water will make the water boil. Hence due care is highly recommended. What the pyro/hydroxide formula offers is the highest acutance that can be obtained. Hydroxide provides that, as an accelerator. The emulsion side of the negative feels like a Bas Relief when you run your finger over the emulsion image. What is missing here is the original textural quality of a salted silver print. My attempts at scanning and digital manipulation for posting images basically sucks, on top of the red/green deficiency. My apologies.
Salted Silver Print ~ "Jerome House"
1986 ~ 5"x7" ~ Unique
Jerome, Arizona
Friday, August 19, 2016
Expansion ~ Compaction Negative Control
There remains old terminology in photography like "overexposed" or "underexposed" to denote the level of recorded light upon the negative. This is but one variable in a three variable relationship. The amount of light is only over or under exposed if, and only if, the developer, its dilution, and the development time remains constant. That would be a shame, as there are variations upon the theme for mixing these three variables to arrive at the contrast index/density range, desired.
Redefining the variables; 1) amount of light given the negative, 2) developing agent, 3) dilution of the developer. One of the primary reasons the third variable is seldom if ever used is simply because most photographers continue to use pre-packaged developers and dilution is not a normal part of that setup. Pre-packaged developers were meant to use as is. Because of this, I restate that this article is based upon mixing your own chemistry, and can therefore control dilution levels of the developer.
As was covered in the previous article on "Time & Dilution", those are two of the variables available the photographer. The third leg of that calculus is how much light to give the negative before adding the other variables. Back in the day, I was most interested in visual texture of the image, printing silver gelatin prints. To maximize texture of an image it is beneficial to have the contrast index curve favor the higher densities, another way of describing pushing the densities up to the shoulder of the curve. My method of doing that was "overexposing" the negative by setting my ISO from ISO 125 to ISO 80, ISO 400 to ISO 320. To compensate for that in order not to blow out the upper end of the densities (highlights) I reduced the development time slightly (approximately 1 min), or, I diluted the formula.
That method is referred to as a 'compaction'. Compacting the tonal range by holding back the upper tonal ranges from Zone 6 thru Zone 8, which are the tonal ranges that are affected by development, either more or less. Zone 5 down, remain unchanged by further development, after they have reached their maximum density during development. The rough calculus for this arrangement is 1 min reduction in development for every stop over the standard constant. If you overexpose one stop, a one minute reduction in developing time compensates for the 'overexposure'.
Reciprocally, an expansion is the reverse of this, when an image is 'underexposed', lacking sufficient light on the film to arrive at a full scaled negative that otherwise would have been in a printable range had it had more light. Again, for every stop under normal exposure, adding one minute of developing time increases the upper densities to arrive at a longer tonal range (density range).
Compaction: Reducing the development time:
N-1 = 1 min less development ~ N-2 = 2 minutes less development
Expansion: Adding to the development time:
N+1 = 1 min more development ~ N+2 = 2 minutes more development
The uses for this method is simply to offset lighting conditions when they are not optimal. When confronted with a flat day of less than five stops, be it a rainy day or just soft flat lighting, meter the scene for an average, stop down one, or two stops, then shoot. When developing, use the N+1 or N+2 developing times, respective of the number of stops used when shooting. This stretches out the contrast index curve, increasing contrast proportionate to the N-factor used during shooting & developing.
Conversely, the opposite can be used when it is very high contrast shooting. By reversing the procedure, there is the option of simply reducing the development using N-1 or N-2 times, the upper densities (highlights) can be held within a printable range. One can also 'overexpose' just a bit for more shadow detail, which would then require a more robust use of the N-2 development to keep the upper densities from becoming too dense to print well.
For any of the above to be of any use to the photographer, film testing is necessary. The photographer needs to know what the baseline is for that film, lens and developer/development time being used. That is easily done using the towel test. That is next. An example of an image using compaction is below. It was shot in my home studio space I built around an existing carport. The front window of that studio area is seen in the image. The view is north, thus true north lighting, which still was quite different than the ambient light inside the studio. I exposed one stop over standard meter reading, then used the N-1 development to hold in the brightness through the window. Then there's the visual translation from the scanned slide and the digital representation I arrived at with the image. Forgive the loss between the two images.
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Studio Light"
1986 ~ 8"x10" ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon
Redefining the variables; 1) amount of light given the negative, 2) developing agent, 3) dilution of the developer. One of the primary reasons the third variable is seldom if ever used is simply because most photographers continue to use pre-packaged developers and dilution is not a normal part of that setup. Pre-packaged developers were meant to use as is. Because of this, I restate that this article is based upon mixing your own chemistry, and can therefore control dilution levels of the developer.
As was covered in the previous article on "Time & Dilution", those are two of the variables available the photographer. The third leg of that calculus is how much light to give the negative before adding the other variables. Back in the day, I was most interested in visual texture of the image, printing silver gelatin prints. To maximize texture of an image it is beneficial to have the contrast index curve favor the higher densities, another way of describing pushing the densities up to the shoulder of the curve. My method of doing that was "overexposing" the negative by setting my ISO from ISO 125 to ISO 80, ISO 400 to ISO 320. To compensate for that in order not to blow out the upper end of the densities (highlights) I reduced the development time slightly (approximately 1 min), or, I diluted the formula.
That method is referred to as a 'compaction'. Compacting the tonal range by holding back the upper tonal ranges from Zone 6 thru Zone 8, which are the tonal ranges that are affected by development, either more or less. Zone 5 down, remain unchanged by further development, after they have reached their maximum density during development. The rough calculus for this arrangement is 1 min reduction in development for every stop over the standard constant. If you overexpose one stop, a one minute reduction in developing time compensates for the 'overexposure'.
Reciprocally, an expansion is the reverse of this, when an image is 'underexposed', lacking sufficient light on the film to arrive at a full scaled negative that otherwise would have been in a printable range had it had more light. Again, for every stop under normal exposure, adding one minute of developing time increases the upper densities to arrive at a longer tonal range (density range).
Compaction: Reducing the development time:
N-1 = 1 min less development ~ N-2 = 2 minutes less development
Expansion: Adding to the development time:
N+1 = 1 min more development ~ N+2 = 2 minutes more development
The uses for this method is simply to offset lighting conditions when they are not optimal. When confronted with a flat day of less than five stops, be it a rainy day or just soft flat lighting, meter the scene for an average, stop down one, or two stops, then shoot. When developing, use the N+1 or N+2 developing times, respective of the number of stops used when shooting. This stretches out the contrast index curve, increasing contrast proportionate to the N-factor used during shooting & developing.
Conversely, the opposite can be used when it is very high contrast shooting. By reversing the procedure, there is the option of simply reducing the development using N-1 or N-2 times, the upper densities (highlights) can be held within a printable range. One can also 'overexpose' just a bit for more shadow detail, which would then require a more robust use of the N-2 development to keep the upper densities from becoming too dense to print well.
For any of the above to be of any use to the photographer, film testing is necessary. The photographer needs to know what the baseline is for that film, lens and developer/development time being used. That is easily done using the towel test. That is next. An example of an image using compaction is below. It was shot in my home studio space I built around an existing carport. The front window of that studio area is seen in the image. The view is north, thus true north lighting, which still was quite different than the ambient light inside the studio. I exposed one stop over standard meter reading, then used the N-1 development to hold in the brightness through the window. Then there's the visual translation from the scanned slide and the digital representation I arrived at with the image. Forgive the loss between the two images.
Silver Gelatin Print ~ "Studio Light"
1986 ~ 8"x10" ~ Unique
Eugene, Oregon
Scaling The Negative for Printing
The basis of all black and white printing has to do with the negative. Well Duh. That part is generally understood. What is not generally understood is how the negative is shaped and controlled to the desired density range needed for different printing needs. Printing a silver gelatin print requires a negative with a density range between (Log E) .55 to .75 in densitometric terms. Those densities are for a projector enlarger using a condenser head or cold light head, respectively.
Two elements make up the density curve which creates the gradation of black (silver) from a deep rich black (DMax) at the lower end (toe) from paper base white at the upper end (shoulder). A fully scaled print. The shoulder & toe refers to the contrast index curve's density range of the negative, with the thickest densities at the top (shoulder) and the thinnest densities at the base of the curve (toe).
Contrast index curve seen as D Log E function;
The above scale has to do with time & density relationship, which every photographer who has developed negatives is familiar with. The general rule being that increased development time increases the densities of the negative. The more specific understanding of this rule being that this defines the densities above Zone 5. Once the tonal densities from Zone 1 through Zone 5 have been developed, no further amount of development will alter those densities. The tonal densities that will continue to develop begin around Zone 6, with each subsequent tonal density further increasing in density respectively. Understanding this relationship defines the ability to control these densities of the upper end of the scale by applying the expansion & compaction principle.
As the chart indicates, the two functions of the developing relationship are density and time, with density dependent on time. There is another element which alters this relationship. Developer dilution. The vast majority of photographers today use pre-packaged developers for negatives and prints; Kodak's D76 and Dektol. There are others, but these two are by far the biggest sellers. Here's the thing. One still needs to mix the pre-packaged chemicals to be used, and you are paying for the convenience of someone else actually mixing the chemicals before weighing them out and packaging them. That is no different than using Bisquick to make your pancakes, when you can add the three dry ingredients yourself. We have become slaves to convenience, even when it is not in our best interest.
I know, I have written on this before. I would tell you that it is important for having full control over the development of the negative. The formula I wrote about was Beutler 105, a non M/Q developer, using only Metol as the reducing agent. I believe this to be probably the best general negative developing formula available. Formulas will come later. Next, though, is controlling the negative further through a compaction or expansion process, using time & dilution as the controlling functions.
Two elements make up the density curve which creates the gradation of black (silver) from a deep rich black (DMax) at the lower end (toe) from paper base white at the upper end (shoulder). A fully scaled print. The shoulder & toe refers to the contrast index curve's density range of the negative, with the thickest densities at the top (shoulder) and the thinnest densities at the base of the curve (toe).
Contrast index curve seen as D Log E function;
The above scale has to do with time & density relationship, which every photographer who has developed negatives is familiar with. The general rule being that increased development time increases the densities of the negative. The more specific understanding of this rule being that this defines the densities above Zone 5. Once the tonal densities from Zone 1 through Zone 5 have been developed, no further amount of development will alter those densities. The tonal densities that will continue to develop begin around Zone 6, with each subsequent tonal density further increasing in density respectively. Understanding this relationship defines the ability to control these densities of the upper end of the scale by applying the expansion & compaction principle.
As the chart indicates, the two functions of the developing relationship are density and time, with density dependent on time. There is another element which alters this relationship. Developer dilution. The vast majority of photographers today use pre-packaged developers for negatives and prints; Kodak's D76 and Dektol. There are others, but these two are by far the biggest sellers. Here's the thing. One still needs to mix the pre-packaged chemicals to be used, and you are paying for the convenience of someone else actually mixing the chemicals before weighing them out and packaging them. That is no different than using Bisquick to make your pancakes, when you can add the three dry ingredients yourself. We have become slaves to convenience, even when it is not in our best interest.
I know, I have written on this before. I would tell you that it is important for having full control over the development of the negative. The formula I wrote about was Beutler 105, a non M/Q developer, using only Metol as the reducing agent. I believe this to be probably the best general negative developing formula available. Formulas will come later. Next, though, is controlling the negative further through a compaction or expansion process, using time & dilution as the controlling functions.
Thursday, August 18, 2016
Salt Paper Print ~ Salted Silver
In past posts I covered silver printing in general, including the various printing methods using silver, including salt paper, Kallitype, Van Dyke Brown and Albumen. There are actually a couple more offshoots but I want to keep the focus on the primary methods, the ones that endured over time. When I began printing with hand coated methods I began with the earliest and simplest form of the procedures; the salt paper print, or as I refer to the method, salted silver prints.
As I also noted, back in the day there was no internet to go to for information, we relied on the tried and true method of finding a book on the subject. Quaint, that. Not quite the same as clicking on Google and keying in a question, which Google then completes with a list of potential options.... My option at the time was "The Keepers of Light" which remains a very good source of information on photographic methods and techniques. My first foray was the salted silver, as it was something I could afford at the time, and, which promised a finished print that was, for all practical purposes, something akin to a platinum/palladium print. I knew first hand what those prints looked like as I represented five platinum/palladium printers at that time in my gallery. I really liked those hand coated prints.
The principle of the salted print is very simple. Two elements need to come into contact while being exposed to ultraviolet (UV) light; salt and silver. That creates the black left on the paper after exposure. Bringing those two elements together on paper to create a finished image is not an absolute or fixed method. There is a fair amount of accommodation available to compensate for the density range of the negative, by altering the two constituent elements respectively. As I have noted in earlier posts, the density range of a negative, beyond being "thin" or "thick", is measured using the D Log E curve densitometric notations; Log E 1.2 to 1.8 densities respectively for printing in most hand coated methods. I will explain the concept of D Log E, as well as the related procedures of expansion and compaction in a following post for a better understanding of this concept. For now, it is assumed the photographer has a negative with sufficient densities to print in hand coated silver.
Salted Paper "Binder";
Sodium Chloride ~ Table Salt (try to use unprocessed salt) I use Sea Salt
Silver Solution;
Silver Nitrate; (crystals)
Mixture ratios for negative densities;
For negatives that have a density range of Log E 1.2 - 1.8 (preferred density range)
Salt ~ 2% - 3%
Silver ~ 12% solution
For negatives with a density range below Log E 1.2 (thinner negatives)
Salt ~ 1% - 1 1/2%
Silver ~ 10% solution
The above mixture ratios are standard issue from most sources available today. Just know they are just that, standard applications from which one begins from. As I have posited many times, black and white photography is very malleable, and can be applied in many various ways. The relationship to take away from the above ratios is simply that thicker negatives require increased portions of both salt & silver. By substituting the amount of salt solution percentage as well as silver solution, it is possible to accommodate a range of negative densities. Testing of course is very desirable.
My silver/salt printing ratio for the images I've been posting.
Silver Nitrate ~ 13% solution (saturated solution)
Salt (table salt) ~ 2 1/2% solution
Paper Preparations; (My formula)
Water (at 120 degrees) 1000 ml
Salt (2 1/2% solution) 25 g
After pouring the salted water into a developing tray, slip the printing paper into the tray and agitate enough to keep the paper from laying flat on the bottom of the tray. Soak the paper for at least thirty seconds, making sure all areas are evenly soaked, then hang to dry. I used a length of twine hung above the sink and wooden clothes pins strung along the twine for pinning and hanging the paper after soaking. That's it. Paper that has been salted can be stored in a dark, dry area for a good length of time without deterioration.
Application of Silver;
I used the above formula of salt with a silver solution of 13%, which is a saturated solution of silver. I always double coated my prints with the silver solution, drying the first coating before applying a second coat. My reasoning for this was simple. The old silver saturated papers of the past were so much more richer than the newer papers. More silver, saturated deeper into the paper, should, theoretically return a richer print with deeper blacks, leaving a print with more visual depth and texture. From my experience, that position was vindicated after comparing a one coat print with a two coated print.
Once the paper that has been coated with the silver solution it can be stored in a dark dry place as well, for awhile. I use old printing paper boxes for storing my treated paper, well marked to keep the different papers separated. Personally speaking, I do not store a silver coated paper. I print as soon as it is properly dried. The pre-salted sheets of paper can be kept in a printing paper box for a week or more, ready for applying the silver when needed, without any deleterious effects.
When I began printing hand coated silver, I had only the sun as my UV source. That takes a bit of experimentation to realize a printing time, according to a "sky choice". I used the north light method, keeping the printing frame in north light shade, aiming the print towards open blue sky, away from direct sunlight. That will be about as constant as once can get using sunlight. It is very important to meter the sky you will be using and noting the intensity, usually in lumens, to keep tract of printing time. This is important.
There is a relationship between light intensity and print contrast. The lower the light intensity and longer the printing time, the more contrasty the final print. With caveats. Hence, if the print is faced into the direct sunlight, the printing is much more rapid, affecting the high density ranges far more quickly than when in low light, thereby tending to 'flatten' the image more. Using the north light, lower intensity input tends to lengthen the tonal range of the print as it prints in much slower. This relationship allows the printer to use either, or both methods combined, to control the printing process further. If the negative is very dense at the upper end, one can print in much of the print using north light, then turn it to full sun for a minute or so to burn in the upper tonal range, usually Zone 7-8. Reciprocally, if a thinner negative is used, one can use strictly north light only to increase the final tonal range to the maximum amount for that negative.
Upcoming posts will focus on selecting a paper for printing, and a method of scaling a negative for the correct density range for printing hand coated processes.
As I also noted, back in the day there was no internet to go to for information, we relied on the tried and true method of finding a book on the subject. Quaint, that. Not quite the same as clicking on Google and keying in a question, which Google then completes with a list of potential options.... My option at the time was "The Keepers of Light" which remains a very good source of information on photographic methods and techniques. My first foray was the salted silver, as it was something I could afford at the time, and, which promised a finished print that was, for all practical purposes, something akin to a platinum/palladium print. I knew first hand what those prints looked like as I represented five platinum/palladium printers at that time in my gallery. I really liked those hand coated prints.
The principle of the salted print is very simple. Two elements need to come into contact while being exposed to ultraviolet (UV) light; salt and silver. That creates the black left on the paper after exposure. Bringing those two elements together on paper to create a finished image is not an absolute or fixed method. There is a fair amount of accommodation available to compensate for the density range of the negative, by altering the two constituent elements respectively. As I have noted in earlier posts, the density range of a negative, beyond being "thin" or "thick", is measured using the D Log E curve densitometric notations; Log E 1.2 to 1.8 densities respectively for printing in most hand coated methods. I will explain the concept of D Log E, as well as the related procedures of expansion and compaction in a following post for a better understanding of this concept. For now, it is assumed the photographer has a negative with sufficient densities to print in hand coated silver.
Salted Paper "Binder";
Sodium Chloride ~ Table Salt (try to use unprocessed salt) I use Sea Salt
Silver Solution;
Silver Nitrate; (crystals)
Mixture ratios for negative densities;
For negatives that have a density range of Log E 1.2 - 1.8 (preferred density range)
Salt ~ 2% - 3%
Silver ~ 12% solution
For negatives with a density range below Log E 1.2 (thinner negatives)
Salt ~ 1% - 1 1/2%
Silver ~ 10% solution
The above mixture ratios are standard issue from most sources available today. Just know they are just that, standard applications from which one begins from. As I have posited many times, black and white photography is very malleable, and can be applied in many various ways. The relationship to take away from the above ratios is simply that thicker negatives require increased portions of both salt & silver. By substituting the amount of salt solution percentage as well as silver solution, it is possible to accommodate a range of negative densities. Testing of course is very desirable.
My silver/salt printing ratio for the images I've been posting.
Silver Nitrate ~ 13% solution (saturated solution)
Salt (table salt) ~ 2 1/2% solution
Paper Preparations; (My formula)
Water (at 120 degrees) 1000 ml
Salt (2 1/2% solution) 25 g
After pouring the salted water into a developing tray, slip the printing paper into the tray and agitate enough to keep the paper from laying flat on the bottom of the tray. Soak the paper for at least thirty seconds, making sure all areas are evenly soaked, then hang to dry. I used a length of twine hung above the sink and wooden clothes pins strung along the twine for pinning and hanging the paper after soaking. That's it. Paper that has been salted can be stored in a dark, dry area for a good length of time without deterioration.
Application of Silver;
I used the above formula of salt with a silver solution of 13%, which is a saturated solution of silver. I always double coated my prints with the silver solution, drying the first coating before applying a second coat. My reasoning for this was simple. The old silver saturated papers of the past were so much more richer than the newer papers. More silver, saturated deeper into the paper, should, theoretically return a richer print with deeper blacks, leaving a print with more visual depth and texture. From my experience, that position was vindicated after comparing a one coat print with a two coated print.
Once the paper that has been coated with the silver solution it can be stored in a dark dry place as well, for awhile. I use old printing paper boxes for storing my treated paper, well marked to keep the different papers separated. Personally speaking, I do not store a silver coated paper. I print as soon as it is properly dried. The pre-salted sheets of paper can be kept in a printing paper box for a week or more, ready for applying the silver when needed, without any deleterious effects.
When I began printing hand coated silver, I had only the sun as my UV source. That takes a bit of experimentation to realize a printing time, according to a "sky choice". I used the north light method, keeping the printing frame in north light shade, aiming the print towards open blue sky, away from direct sunlight. That will be about as constant as once can get using sunlight. It is very important to meter the sky you will be using and noting the intensity, usually in lumens, to keep tract of printing time. This is important.
There is a relationship between light intensity and print contrast. The lower the light intensity and longer the printing time, the more contrasty the final print. With caveats. Hence, if the print is faced into the direct sunlight, the printing is much more rapid, affecting the high density ranges far more quickly than when in low light, thereby tending to 'flatten' the image more. Using the north light, lower intensity input tends to lengthen the tonal range of the print as it prints in much slower. This relationship allows the printer to use either, or both methods combined, to control the printing process further. If the negative is very dense at the upper end, one can print in much of the print using north light, then turn it to full sun for a minute or so to burn in the upper tonal range, usually Zone 7-8. Reciprocally, if a thinner negative is used, one can use strictly north light only to increase the final tonal range to the maximum amount for that negative.
Upcoming posts will focus on selecting a paper for printing, and a method of scaling a negative for the correct density range for printing hand coated processes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)