Having now devoured four photographic "Bibles" by four very competent photographers speaking on this subject, there is consensus with procedures and outcomes, although each author takes the reader down slightly different roads to get to the cabin. In doing so, each author showcased an element worthy of further study. One such element being a newer and better method of contrast control for palladium printing. And that, has to do with density range of the corresponding negative. The baseline standard density range would be that of a negative that would make a good image on a commercial silver gelatin grade 2 paper.
What is made abundantly clear is that to achieve a good palladium print, the negative should have a density range of 1.2 to 1.8. That is a dense negative. One that takes a very long time to print in a UV printer. This would also be a good density range for printing in silver, either salt paper or Kallitype. I bring these two up merely because I have printed extensively in both processes. There are even levels of silver solution and salt (iron binder) to accommodate a long spectrum of density ranges. I would tell you that silver isn't as forgiving as palladium.
For now I continue to print the 5x7 negatives until I have a full portfolio of those images. The next step for me is switching over all printing to palladium and gum. Retire the silver. A recent photo outing with a local photographer friend turned out well, as we at the edge of Cochise Stronghold while different thunderstorms played out all around us. Under the circumstances, this was a digital outing, and I had my old trusty Canon 20D, shooting in RAW mode set to black and white. I also kept in mind that my normal shooting mode to shoot edge to edge as I see it needed to be opened up sufficiently to allow for later cropping from the 8x12 to 8x10 format.
What I want to know is simply this; can I take any existing digital image and print it in palladium using my UV printer. In Lightroom, I took the original image and snapped it out a bit, using the four basic control slides, to separate the tonal values better and accentuate the overall image. That image then went through Paintshop Pro to reverse the image, and add a <curves> function, increasing the densities as said Bibles proscribed. Then I tried making a palladium print using the UV printer.
The test print said it all. The image was about halfway to fully printed in. Zone 7 was just forming, at 7 minute print time. As I observed while printing the denser 5x7 negatives, the amount of image that will be seen before development, has everything to do with the density range of the negative. If the negative is 'soft', that is of normal density (think silver gel print) then one would see the "whisper" noted in the books. If the negative has a density range of 1.8, I can tell you first hand that you will need to see way more than even the "stage whisper" spoken of for a Kallitype. It's the same function. The more density range of the negative, the more the undeveloped image must be seen before development. With four print trials to draw from, with those dense negatives, zone 4 (at least) needs to be seen and I look for the beginning of zone 5.
That negative I just printed has far more contrast than needed. The print time was 7 minutes, and half the image is in. That negative would print well in the open sun. That isn't what I'm after. I want to use the UV printer because the output is exactly the same each and every time I use it. No guesswork involved. I have retraced my steps and undone the <curves> adjustment to the image. It is now back to a simple reversal of the original image, just a bit more snappy. That, is the next test, and I expect it to return some very nice results.
Original Positive image;
This is what the final print is to look like;
No comments:
Post a Comment