To be honest, I had intended on posting the last two posts in reverse order. The paper preparation comes before the mixing of the coating, and, the samples of each level of printing demonstrate what was learned from the earlier print to the final print. Most notably, the sizing, print times, and learning the sheerest watercolor pigments. The images are representative of those differences, respectively.
I came away from today's print session with one workable print, although still not to my liking. I am here working with three processes. Each with unique printing characteristics, and each with variant formulas to deal with as well as print times. Having covered these three processes in general terms, as well as detailed explanations, procedures and formulas, I will begin focusing more on each process in more detail as dynamic progress allows. So far, testing has been the focus, especially since building the Solar Printer. It is working flawlessly. The switch from sun to Solar Printer necessitated increasing negative density overall, and in some cases increasing densities relatively, as in middle tones and highlights; this is increasing the density range of the negative.
The overall density increase was achieved using Dan Burkholder's method of overlaying a green color using a adjustment layer. As I move along I am recognizing and dealing with more variables added to the process. Each variable alters the outcome of the image, sometimes in subtle ways, sometimes jaw dropping things come along that take some time to figure out why a predictable outcome didn't happen, or happened opposed to what was predicted.
During today's testing I began printing Kallitypes, using the new negatives that were printed yesterday. Those negatives were created in two different ways, with the outcome showing up quite well. My normal procedure is taking any negative that wasn't created on b&w film and developed out traditionally, and using Corel's photo algorithm for making an image a black & white image. I have found that to leave the image with the very long scale expected from a black & white negative that was scaled the same. Merely changing an image to a gray scale likely returns a tonal gradation of 250, whereas a true conversion would realize a scale much, much longer than that, in a continuous tone. Smooth, with lots of textural detail.
One set of negatives were processed using this algorithm, then being reversed (negative) then were toned green, to a known amount. The second negative of this tale, was a black and white image shot on film and developed out, then the negative was scanned, leaving a very nice positive. I took that positive, without any manipulation of any tonal range, 'inverted it' (PJ's updated Photoshop & LR)
then added the known amount of green toning and saved it.
The only real variable between the two images is the the tonal scale assigned. For the one, it was reversed as a scanned RGB image. The other had been filtered through the "Black & White Film" algorithm. Print #1; Adley on the Stump (Inverted RGB) and Print #2; Disuse #1 (Black & White Film) What I am finding is that image #1, direct reversal from positive to negative is a shorter scaled print than image #2, which was converted to what I believe was a longer scaled tonal range represented in the negative. I have yet to confirm this with specific testing but the preliminary results do suggest this.
The reason I haven't accepted this yet as fact is simply I printed the two images in different processes, although the print times for each print were the same; 13 minutes in the Solar Printer. That was the good news. We are closing in on the print time desired, which is possible using the spectral density of the green toned negatives. That retards the printing sufficiently to roughly double the print time before using the green toning. The measurement of that derives from the 'shift' to green (Lightroom) PJ put to the images before printing.
Turns out "Adley on the Stump" printed quite nicely, far more contrasty than I could have imagined from the visual densities on the negative. "Disuse #1" is visually has roughly the same visual density range. I printed Adley as a Kallitype, and Disuse as a salted silver. There was a reason for that. A sort of secondary test for comparative analysis, between the two. The first print through was a third image, with seemingly the same density range and the same green assignment. That print took 30 minutes to print in. Even come close to printing in. Then when it hit the developer it darkened down like crazy. I used the "Black" developer, using thiocyanate & tartaric acid instead of sodium citrate. This was way more than normal darkening upon dry down. Somewhere I went wrong.
The two other prints were both 13 minute prints, as hoped for. Adley, being another Kallitype, reacted quite differently. The image had printed in right up to Zone 7, filling in detail nicely, with the rest of the tonal range falling into place as expected. When that print went into the developer, it lightened up, losing all the detail in Zone 7 turning it into Zone 8. I was not happy. And that is why I shifted to salted silver printing. I know that process intimately and there is no dry down like the Kallitype.
That print also was a 13 minute print, and there was no darkening or lightening. Just where I printed it to. Both of those prints were toned in palladium, now rendering them palladium prints. What is noticeable to my eye right away is the tonality differences, and how they arrived. For the Adley image, beyond the loss of texture, is the gradations of the tonal range are short and few. It is a much more 'contrasty' looking image, whereas the Disuse image has a much longer tonal range. A secondary visual aspect of the Disuse image is that the middle tones are missing, leaving an image that to my eye looks like a lithograph or Inked type of image. I have no doubt that is derived from earlier manipulation of the tones in an ill advised attempt as 'increasing contrast'. It didn't. Just dropped out the middle tone densities between high tone ones.
Having these prints for comparison now shows me a methodology that will leave an image that mimics a traditional continuous tone negative. That is the task for now. I will of course be posting them, just as soon as they dry down fully. Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment