Mounting Cyanotypes

[tgtaylor]

Great images guys!

I've read that the Kallitype requires a negative with a DR of 1.8 which would print on a zero grade paper. I don't have a densitometer and the image that I last posted
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...postcount=1297I rotary developed for 10 minutes instead of the normal 7.75 minutes. However the resulting print lacked sufficient contrast which I corrected for in the above scan by boosting the contrast in PS. So last Sunday before the Super Bowl I drove down and re-shot it increasing the development time to 17 minutes. It's certainly a more contrasty negative and I'm planning to print it tomorrow now that the sun is back. One negative is still undeveloped in the holder pending the outcome.

Also this afternoon I stopped by a Blicks store in Berkeley (Pete were lucky here in the Bay Area where we have 3 Art Blick stores and a few others that carry a complete selection of papers and supplies.) and bought 2 sheets of 140-lb Fabriano Extra White which I cut down to 11x15 sheets. I haven't tried Fabriano or 140-lb paper yet so I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

As far as digital negatives, well this morning I ordered 2 packs of Pictorico OHP which I hop works out because I have a number of 35mm, 6x45, 6x7 and 4x5 negatives which would make good candidates for an alternative process.

Thomas

[Pete Watkins]

Mr Bryant,
Photography is my hobby and after some years of practicing the art and looking at other peoples work I've come to respect the work and opinions of certain photographers on this forum. Gandolfi has stated that he believes that real photographic negatives produced using a large format camera are superior to digital negatives. I've put up this post seeking help and advice from those who are more experienced than I am at working with the cyanotype process. Lets not turn it into another traditional vs digital post. I have the cameras and I use them!

I tried a few watercolour papers and the highly recommended Platine came out on top by a long way but I can't get it locally so I'm trying other recommended papers that are available locally. IF i'm not satisfied I'll take a cheap train trip to London.

My brushing style....well, although as far as I've read Dr. Mike Ware doesn't see the point in showing the brush marks as part of the image I personally feel that the brush marks on a cyanotype (and other alternative processes) tell the viewer, and prospective buyer, that this image is an individual image and that it would be hard to reproduce exactly. Again, just my personal preference.
Pete.

[D. Bryant]

Great images guys!

I've read that the Kallitype requires a negative with a DR of 1.8 which would print on a zero grade paper. I don't have a densitometer and the image that I last posted
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...postcount=1297I rotary developed for 10 minutes instead of the normal 7.75 minutes. However the resulting print lacked sufficient contrast which I corrected for in the above scan by boosting the contrast in PS. So last Sunday before the Super Bowl I drove down and re-shot it increasing the development time to 17 minutes. It's certainly a more contrasty negative and I'm planning to print it tomorrow now that the sun is back. One negative is still undeveloped in the holder pending the outcome.

Also this afternoon I stopped by a Blicks store in Berkeley (Pete were lucky here in the Bay Area where we have 3 Art Blick stores and a few others that carry a complete selection of papers and supplies.) and bought 2 sheets of 140-lb Fabriano Extra White which I cut down to 11x15 sheets. I haven't tried Fabriano or 140-lb paper yet so I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

As far as digital negatives, well this morning I ordered 2 packs of Pictorico OHP which I hop works out because I have a number of 35mm, 6x45, 6x7 and 4x5 negatives which would make good candidates for an alternative process.

Thomas

If you are going to do alternative processes then you need to use a step tablet to determine what the actual DR of the processes are in your darkroom, with your chemicals, and your paper, etc. Don't take someone else's word about what the characteristics of a process are.

FAEW, may not be the best choice for kallitype printing without acidification.

Freestyle's OHP is a drop in replacement for Pictorico OHP and is less expensive, BTW.

[D. Bryant]

Mr Bryant

My father was Mr. Bryant, no need for formalities here!

Gandolfi has stated that he believes that real photographic negatives produced using a large format camera are superior to digital negatives

.

Many just as experienced as Gandolfi would disagree.

Lets not turn it into another traditional vs digital post. I have the cameras and I use them!

That wasn't my intent, you made the reference to Gandolfi's opinion, I was just curious about what that might be. Let's just move along then.

I tried a few watercolour papers and the highly recommended Platine came out on top by a long way but I can't get it locally so I'm trying other recommended papers that are available locally. IF i'm not satisfied I'll take a cheap train trip to London.

You will find that many papers are hostile to Cyanotype. Platine is a no brainer. Stock up and it will be something you need not worry about.

My brushing style....well, although as far as I've read Dr. Mike Ware doesn't see the point in showing the brush marks as part of the image

I agree totally with Dr. Ware. Brush marks add nothing to the artistic intent of the printed image. Potential buyers will purchase a print because they like the image, not the brush marks.

They will be interested in the process after the fact. Just because a print is 'Alt' doesn't make it interesting. Showing brush marks are a superfluous affectation intended to elevate a print as high art. Unfortunately people often get hung up on making attractive brush marks.

Don Bryant

[tgtaylor]

If you are going to do alternative processes then you need to use a step tablet to determine what the actual DR of the processes are in your darkroom, with your chemicals, and your paper, etc. Don't take someone else's word about what the characteristics of a process are.

FAEW, may not be the best choice for kallitype printing without acidification.

Freestyle's OHP is a drop in replacement for Pictorico OHP and is less expensive, BTW.

Thanks for the post D. Bryant.

Last week I downloaded Sandy King's unblinkingeye article on gold toning the Vandyke and noticed the recommendation of presoaking in a weak citric or oxalic acid before coating. I'm going to try it both ways and see if the presoak makes a difference. Last week I followed the recommendation of holding the paper over a pot of boiling water for a couple of minutes immediately before coating but didn't see a difference. But I was using Crane's Platinotype which may not require a high RH.

Thanks for the tip on Freestyle.

Thomas

[Vaughn]

I see the difference between camera negatives and digital negatives as being very similar to the differences between showing or not showing brush marks (or the rebate of the film, notches and all). In others words, none, except for the way a particular photographer/artist wishes to work and how he/she wishes their work to look like.

So in that regard I disagree with Ware and Bryant. Brush marks can be superfluous, as can sharpness, clean print edges, step wedges, testing, framing, et al.

[tgtaylor]

I agree with Vaughn on the brush marks. If done well they look good on a print in my eye. But I'm in Pete's position in that my brush marks don't look good so yesterday I bought a roll of Scotch brand Low Tack Artist Tape with the idea of forming a hard border without brush marks.

Thomas

[D. Bryant]

Actually, just putting them in the dark for awhile is suppose to rejuvenate them, too.

I would go with unbuffered rag board.

Vaughn

What Vaughn said. I've seen Anna Atkins cyanotype prints that are over 100 years old that look like they were printed yesterday.

[Vaughn]

What Vaughn said. I've seen Anna Atkins cyanotype prints that are over 100 years old that look like they were printed yesterday.

Was she the person credited with having the first photographs in a book? (photograms of ferns or something like that).

Vaughn

[D. Bryant]

Was she the person credited with having the first photographs in a book? (photograms of ferns or something like that).

Vaughn

Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Atkins