Kallitype emulsion on film. Is it ruined?

[Pitcherman]

Hi all,
I was doing some kallitype printing–I am very new to this process– and it appears I was a bit over zealous and did not let the paper dry sufficiently. So, when I went to process the print, I pulled up the negative and some of the emulsion came with it. I have tried rinsing it but I still have very noticeable reddish patches on the film. Does anyone know a good way to clean this stain?
Thanks in advance,
robert

[Erik Larsen]

Might try using a fix to remove the silver in the k type emulsion, not sure about the FO. Worth a shot maybe? Good luck.
Erik

[Cletus]

Soak the negative in 1:1 mixture of Sodium Sulfite and EDTA, which is also the clearing solution and the equivalent of fixer for pt/pd prints. It should remove any unexposed/unprecipitated silver and ferrous salts left over from the ferric oxalate (that stuck to your negative).

It's worth a try anyway and I don't believe this mixture will damage your negative. Still, proceed at your own risk, this is just a suggestion.....

[benrains]

Not that it'll help you in this case, but perhaps something to keep in mind for the future, one trick is to separate the negatives from the underlying printing paper using a sheet of clear mylar.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I too ruined a perfectly good negative and whatever I tried, I could not remove the small bits of kallitype emulsion. Practice with a negative that's not important to you and one that has a decent density range. Using clear mylar between the negative and sensitized paper is sound advice. Are you drying the emulsion with a blow dryer? What exposure unit are you using?

[Pitcherman]

102100102101
Well at least I am in good company Andrew. :) And I did dry the paper. I am using a florescent exposure unit that I made myself. I, too, am intrigued by the idea of using a sheet of Mylar. My only concern would be softening the final image. I would just have to test it.
Thanks to all for the input. I also spoke with Dana Sullivan at B+S and he said basically what you guys have said, and that is to try clearing the spots with any chemical combinations that might make sense, but that what caused the spots was an actual chemical reaction and not just a transfer of the emulsion. He also recommended trying to print through it, which I did. the bottom line is that that spots seem to be permanent. luckily the lathe is in my Dad's shop and I can reshoot it. I scanned in an OK print, as well as a scan of the culprit. I circled the areas where the damage occurred. Hope others can learn from my screw ups.

Cheers,
robert

[Andrew O'Neill]

Robert, you'll barely notice a difference in loss of sharpness printing through mylar. You only really notice it if you place a mylar and non mylar prints side-by-side. It's the same when I print in carbon transfer. Many times I print with the emulsion facing up (therefore then image will be correctly oriented when transfered).

[tgtaylor]

FWIW I don't use mylar although I have read about its use in preventing what you experienced. After brush coating the paper, I let it dry about 5 minutes (until the sheen dulls) before taping to the wall to dry and then leave it air dry for 45 minutes to an hour and then place them in a paper safe and use them in the order in which they were hung to dry. Before placing the negative, always flex the paper to make sure that it is bone dry. I use the sun to expose but I place the frame in the open shade instead of in the direct sunlight which gives a better print and prevents heat buildup under the glass which could result in the type of problems that you had.

Thomas

[sanking]

Robert, you'll barely notice a difference in loss of sharpness printing through mylar. You only really notice it if you place a mylar and non mylar prints side-by-side. It's the same when I print in carbon transfer. Many times I print with the emulsion facing up (therefore then image will be correctly oriented when transfered).

I don't actually see any difference at all in sharpness in carbon printing when using a thin mylar (0.003") sheet between the negative and sensitized carbon tissue, compared not using mylar. With carbon it is very easy to misjudge whether the tissue is dry enough and if it is not you will ruin your negative.

Regardless of process I recommend the use of mylar with all hand coated processes as there is always the risk of damaging the negative. I damaged a large 20X24" negative many years ago when making a pt/pd print because there was a spot on the emulsion that had not dried sufficiently and it reacted with the gelatin of the negative. Also, assuming you are printing with camera negatives, I think it best to keep the emulsion of the negative from contacting the chemicals in your sensitized emulsion, whether that be a ferric oxalate, silver nitrate or platinum or palladium, or dichromate. Think about it, you spend a lot of time washing and drying your negatives to make them stable, does it make any sense to then put them in contact with other chemicals as you will find in hand sensitized papers?

Sandy

[Pitcherman]

This just proves the value of this forum. I might have come up with the idea of using a sheet of Mylar between the negative and the emulsion...in about a million years. ;) But to have access to the wisdom of those who have trodden this path already and are willing, eager to share–Sandy, Andrew, Ben, Erik, Cletus is invaluable. Thanks one and all.