Problem with some of my Platinum Palladium prints today

[Michael Lloyd]

I envy your darkroom time. I don't have one and there's no place to put one in my house. I plan to build a large workshop in the near future and it will have a wet darkroom. For now I develop my film in a Jobo and scan. The closest I can get to doing darkroom work is Pt/Pd. I have to say... I spent all day printing yesterday and it was one of the best days that I've experienced in photography. Warts and all

I'm going to go back to the way we printed in the workshop. I'll consider changing things here and there once I get the process down.

Question- I have a DVD set of Patrick Alt working in his darkroom. In the first video he talks about making negatives for Pt/Pd prints. He says- if you normally put your shadows in zone 3, put them in zone 4. If developing calls for N use N+1. Does that sound right? I'm going to take my LF camera out this coming weekend. I also have Dick Arentz's book, Pt_Pd Printing 2nd Edition, but haven't begun to read it yet.

[Vaughn]

It took me two years to start getting carbon prints I was happy with. This was before the internet and all the info now at our fingertips, so all I had was the basic instructions from a magazine article. Also I had never seen a carbon print in the flesh (or gelatin, I suppose), so I did not know what they were 'suppose' to look like. Very few carbon printers 25 years ago!

Part of the 'problem' was that I was needing to change how I processed my negatives for carbon printing at the same time I was learning the process -- gearing both for prints that had the raised relief that I got a hint of in the wet print (but would dry w/o relief). Basically, decreasing the pigment content while increasing the contrast of the negatives. Not very efficient, but I am glad I did it this way -- I learned from my many many failures...countless 12 hour printing sessions with no successful prints.

Dry-down is a big factor for carbon prints, too. The barest hint of texture in the highlights would dry down to a perfect hint of detail, the darkest shadows deepening to rich pure blacks with texture in the form of raised relief.

I have taught many people carbon printing since then, but I emphazise that they will have to go home and fine-tune the process to fit their working space and conditions -- and their personal needs of expression. Carbon is a very versitile process. They can look like Pt prints if you wish, or like silver gelatin, or like no other process. Workshops are great, but one must be careful not to fall into the trap of thinking that your instructor's prints are what all prints could or should look like. The workshops are bus stations...you pick the final destination.

[Vaughn]

...
Question- I have a DVD set of Patrick Alt working in his darkroom. In the first video he talks about making negatives for Pt/Pd prints. He says- if you normally put your shadows in zone 3, put them in zone 4. If developing calls for N use N+1. Does that sound right? I'm going to take my LF camera out this coming weekend. I also have Dick Arentz's book, Pt_Pd Printing 2nd Edition, but haven't begun to read it yet.

Good place to start. All depends on the film and the SBR (subject brightness range). That will determine how you process your film. I usually need to greatly increase development from 'normal'. For carbon printing, one time I actually gave a negative slightly less than normal development -- but then the SBR was a minimum of 14 stops (EV on the Pentax Digital Spotmeter went from 0 to 13 -- and I may have had some below 0. Exposed at 2 (Zone V), highlights fell on Zone XVI, perhaps pulled down to XIV as a guess) It made a wonderful carbon print.

As an aside, for Pt, Terry King suggested using FP4+ developed in Ilford PQ Universal Developer -- he claimed that it gave great expansion with nice seperation in the mid-tones. All I know is that I get wonderful pt prints from those negatives! My use of the developer is all over the place -- I change the time and dilution depending on the SBR and which way the wind is blowing!

[bob carnie]

digital negs vs In camera negs.

this is an area that many , can argue which is better.
Reminds me of the Walt Disney show about Paul Bunyan and the new kid on the block with the chainsaw. I remember crying as a child when Paul faded into the sunset with Babe the blue Ox. I think digital has won like the new kid on the block but Paul and his Ox is still around.

Today we could argue the digital negative gives precise boundaries to work from, but Vaughn has proven that making in camera neg's and customizing his process to fit his needs , beautiful work can be accomplished.

I kind of came at this from two fronts, In the 90/s I made enlarged negatives using FP4 with great success, in the 2012-present period I have been using digital negatives using Pictorico with good results.
Next month I am back to silver negative Ilford Ortho 25 via a digital film recorder, and I will use a Variance method to decide what is the right curve shape.

One thing about digital negatives for a Luddite like me is that unless you have a good technical geek around you all the time, one can get lazy/stupid/ignorant of the way this process works and for me I get the deer in the headlight syndrome when it comes to profiling pictorico negative. I have very limited patience to say the least. What happens if my 7900 blows a gasket, I am not like a lot here able to fix or for that matter have the time.

But when it comes to looking at negatives, well I am in Vaughn's camp , meaning I know a good silver negative when I see one going back to my FP4 days of enlarged negs. As well since 73 I have been looking at negatives and converting them into positive images.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck - well its probably a duck... So if you know how to play with film then making neg's is a piece of cake.
I lost this aspect of my thinking the last few years and was relying too much on laying down dye on pictorico and somehow not really understanding how the whole process can be modified.
My friend Sandy King, well I think he is a genius , and have said so many times on the forums and I know I am not embarrassing him with my praise. Profile plotting is very easy for him and others and this digital negative transition is fluid.

I kind of fall out of place in this regard, and I doubt I will ever fully get it. But the ability to make large silver film negatives excites me because this is something I know.

[Vaughn]

Sandy is amazing. His carbon Yahoo forum ("Carbron") and its discussions of making digital negatives makes my head spin -- and makes me very glad I love working with camera negs for printing! Great information and resources offered there concerning dig negs, but I only chime in when someone asks a basic carbon printing process question, and leave the technical digital questions alone.

The whole process from waking up in the morning, to going out to photograph, to making the final print is all one process for me. If I was going to start incorporating digital negatives into my work flow, I would more than likely change my entire process and way of communicating through photographs. But at 62, I do not have even enough time left of my life to truly master what I am doing now...bad enough I split my time between Pt/pd and carbon!

I am reminded of a 92-yr old master musician who was asked why he still practices every day...he said, "I think I am beginning to see some improvement."

I will move on to something else when I stop improving.

[Michael Lloyd]

I wish I could remember exactly how he said it but Patrick Alt said something to the effect that making prints on digital printers was making posters. I've made a lot of posters since 2008 lol

The print makers in a little photo club that I'm in liked my Pt/Pd's (posted on another thread). Most of my fellow poster makers didn't see the point but some of them saw the difference in the Pt/Pd. Some of them said that they couldn't tell the difference I should have printed the same images to and let them compare. It wouldn't matter though, you either get it and want to do it or your don't. I'm not criticizing. It's just how it is.

I have a friend that is a "film darkroom guy" from way back. He's been instrumental in teaching photography to more people that I've met and I've met a bunch that he's helped. He helps our club every month. I've seen some of his darkroom prints and he was very good. Today he hauls around a DSLR that I gave him and edits in LR and Photoshop Elements. And he makes posters on an Epson 4900. I know that he loves to print and I sense that he misses his darkroom. This coming Sunday... barring anything unforeseen, I am going to load up my Jobo, chemistry, a Sinar 4x5, a Sinar 5x7 (wonderful camera), and a Chamonix 4x5, some loaded film holders and go pick my friend up and take him on a film day. When the light goes south we'll precess the negs in the Jobo. It'll be interesting to see if he keeps his and hauls out his enlarger and trays or just lets me scan them for him. Either way, it'll be nice to catch some light rather than turn off and on bits...

BTW - Vaughn... your last post gave me the idea for the film day trip

PS- I just took a roll of TMAX 400 out of the processor. It's drying now. I found it in the film tray at the bottom of my refrigerator (some silly people put vegetables in theirs). It was in a baggy and marked "exposed". I know I exposed it but I don't know when. Low and behold it has images. We'll see how the negs come out. I'd rather process 4x5 or 5x7. Winding 5mm film on a reel, in a Patterson tent, is not my idea of fun

[Michael Mutmansky]

Heat is bad... very bad. NO HEAT!

Also, eliminate the HCl if you can. It can cause bleaching plus it is volatile and corrodes things. Not good for your lungs. If you need to acidify your water to avoid getting a permanent FO set in the paper, use citric acid or another much less aggressive acid.

Warm developer is fine, but avoid heat when drying the paper.

I don't understand why you would have problems to get the paper to dry with normal temperatures in the DR? Do you work in 80% humidity or do you have an air conditioner? You should be able to let it sit for an hour in the DR in the dark with a little air moving over it and get it sufficiently dry.

Coat up the paper, and let it sit while you get the chemicals out and mix the clearing baths and warm up the developer, etc. Clean the exposure unit. Get the negs ready, etc. When you are ready to print, the paper should be pretty good to go (but of course, you'll need to check).


---Michael

[Michael Lloyd]

I didn't put heat on the paper. Well... not like using a blow dryer which I wouldn't do. I put it in a vehicle that was parked under a shed, and was about 100°F inside. But I get your point.

The Muriatic Acid will not be used again. When I opened the jug it started fuming and I decided right there that the "acid experiment" was over.

I coated some paper the night before I and hung that up in the bathroom with a dark cover over the window. It dried in a few hours and I put the coated paper in the paper safe. It was fine the next morning. I decided to print 4 more prints so I coated 4 more sheets. I don't have a darkroom and the bathroom had too much light in it, even with the window covered, so I put the coated paper in a Doran paper safe once it was coated. I put that in my Landcruiser to dry. After an hour it was still "humid". I should have figured out a way to let it sit inside for an hour with some air flow. Not having a darkroom is a hinderance.

Inside humidity is 50% - 55% most days in the summer. My water temperature is always above 24°C / 75°F (water well) so I have to cool the water bath in my Jobo. Fall and winter conditions are better for film developing and print making.

[karl french]

Those conditions sound somewhat similar to mine in San Francisco. It's typically 70 degrees and 50 percent humidity in my apartment. I don't have a darkroom, but it's fairly easy to set up for platinum/palladium printing here. I only make one print at a time. 3 trays. (1 Dev, 1 Clearing, 1 Holding) Potassium Oxalate developer with 3 Citric Acid clearing baths. Typically after I coat a piece of paper it only takes 30-75 minutes (10x12 paper to 10x22 paper for 8x10 - 8x20 prints) for it to dry enough for printing. I picked up one of those cheap moisture meters on amazon. I aim for 14-16 percent moisture content in coated area of the paper. I just find a cabinet somewhere in the bathroom/vanity/or closet where I set the paper to dry in the dark. A 75 degree room temp/water temp should be just fine for printing. And since we typically overdevelop film for alt printing, the 75 degree water temp can work to you advantage as well. My cold tap water is typically around 65 degrees.

[Vaughn]

Michael, for what it is worth, I have not had a darkroom for three years...bathroom and kitchen at night has to do until I get more done to weather-proof my house for the coming winter.