Old B+W Photograph. Need Help Preserving It.

[Andre Noble]

Apologies for not being directly related to large format. But I would like to a sk the darkroom workers on this site, who regularly concern themselves with issu es of permanence, and many of whom opinion is very trustworthy, for help with th e following:

The only decent photo I have of my mom, who passed away in 1975, is a small unmo unted 3x5 B+W print taken around 1960. It has yellow stains, perhaps due to agi ng and incompletely remove fixer??? The surface of the paper has a semi-matt lik e, microbeaded, plasticky appearance. (I don't know if this is a resin-coated o r fiber paper.)

My question is: Is it too late, to give this print a thorough wash, then a sele nium tone, final wash, and then an archival drymount and overmatt process?

Thank you in advance for your help.

[Merg Ross]

Perhaps with proper filtering you could make a good copy negative and go from there. Just a thought. Regards, Merg Ross

[Per Volquartz]

Shoot a 4X5 copy negative; use a yellow filter if you wish to lighten the stain; use a blue filter if you wish to darken the stain.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I'll also stand behind the suggestions to shoot a large-format copy neg. Try to match the filtration to the color of the stain to remove it.

It should be fiber paper. I don't think there was RC B&W paper yet in 1960.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I think this is one where digital wins hands down, have the print scanned (preferably a good drum scan) and then correct it with photoshop. After I would take it to a service bureau to have them make you a corrected negative on a film recorder. Good luck and I hope you can save the print.

BTW without seeing the print I think is hard to advice you to wet the print, it might be too far gone and the base might separate, thus ruining the print. I would first make me a copy neg before attempting something like that.

[Conrad Hoffman]

Never screw with the original! This might be one of the various textured surfaces available back then. Certainly fiber, maybe the Kodak "silk" finish (can't remember the letter designations). Shoot it through a filter to remove the stain, and maybe with polarizers on the camera and lights to remove reflections from the textured surface. Use a straight-line combination of film and developer suitable for copy work. Or take the digital option, but note that the right filter might be more effective on the stain. Of course, not much is more effective than Photoshop!

[Matthew Runde]

Andre,

I agree with Jorge; scan it at very high resolution, and then correct the stains.

I did something like this recently for a friend whose mother had only one, small (approx. 2x3) photo of her own mother. I used a flatbed scanner to scan it at high res, then removed scratches and toning problems by using Photoshop, and printed an 8x10. In that case I found it easiest to convert it to grayscale before making the corrections, and then re-tone it once I finished. My friend's mother didn't care about the lack of sharpness in the 8x10, and it was exciting to have such a large print.

If you don't have Photoshop, you can probably get a basic version for not too much money. Sometimes it comes bundled with a scanner or digital camera (perhaps an excuse to buy that new Nikon), or you may be able to get an educational discount. These kinds of corrections are not hard to make, but they do take practice and patience.

If you have questions about making these corrections you can feel free to email me, although I do admit that I'm not a Photoshop expert.

Good luck.

[Steve Hamley]

Don't real drum scans (not Imacons which are CCD scanners?)involve fixing the me dium to the drum with an oil?

I like the large format/filter idea, and endorse not messing with the original.

[Andre Noble]

Thank you all very much for steering me away from dipping the photo in water. (Perhaps I just wanted to give my mom a second baptism, but it's not such a great idea)

Your ideas about making a large format negative from the print, with yellow filter to remove the stain, has a wonderful ring to it. I won't have to buy new stuff, or turn the work over to someone else.

Conrad, you are right, by looking at the back of the print, I see the original photo is on some type of Kodak paper.

Thanks all for your kind replies. Andre

[Mateo_2867]

Don't real drum scans (not Imacons which are CCD scanners?)involve fixing the medium to the drum with an oil?

You can use oil with a trans on a drum to prevent Newton Rings, there are also sprays that do a similar type thing. Reflective copy does not require it.