PDA

View Full Version : Best contact paper for early 1900's feel?



ryanmills
2-Jan-2014, 14:06
Experimenting with contact printing and wonder if there are any papers that might mimic the feel of early 1900's contact printing. I really wondered how possible it could be these days but http://www.clavijo.ru/ does an amazing job of getting the feel. Thought would give it a try but could use a starting point.

jp
2-Jan-2014, 16:03
You mean cheap cury contact prints or good professional portraits from early 1900's? Foma Fomatone Classic VC FB Cream Base Warmtone is pretty rugged and classy. A little sepia toning of a normal print does a lot too.

Richard Wasserman
2-Jan-2014, 16:22
You could learn to do Platinum or Albumen printing—2 of the most beautiful processes.

Jac@stafford.net
2-Jan-2014, 16:37
So many people want an instant formula. You are not going to find it here, or anywhere.

ryanmills
2-Jan-2014, 18:50
You mean cheap cury contact prints or good professional portraits from early 1900's? Foma Fomatone Classic VC FB Cream Base Warmtone is pretty rugged and classy. A little sepia toning of a normal print does a lot too.
Yea cheap old prints, I will give the foma a try, thanks.



So many people want an instant formula. You are not going to find it here, or anywhere.

Never said that did I, I did say "Thought would give it a try but could use a starting point.". Just looking for a place to start, sorry I thought this was a place to ask questions.

DannL
2-Jan-2014, 20:02
Ryan,

You're on the right track. Don't worry about the occasional rock-in-the-road. They're inevitable. We just go around them, and continue on our way.

Of topic . . . With regard to the web-site you mentioned, for myself, I am not particularly keen on "modern distressed photography". Obviously being contrived, the "special effects" immediately take away from the image. The first thing I notice is the grunge and distressed appearance that was intentionally added to "impress the viewer". I'm sure it has a following. I'm just not in that group. And now on to the intent of my post . . .

I can't tell you what modern papers will give you the character that you seek for your contact prints, but I have collected a small number of "original prints" from the period mentioned. Most are portraits by well known portrait artists of the time. I'm sure you are aware that a vintage photograph rarely has the appearance of a "modern print" that have been distressed. That's probably why modern prints look like they were made yesterday. ;-) Anyhoo, I'd be glad to provide details of the characteristics of the papers they used, image characteristics, their current visual appearance, and I could provide scans if that helps. My own attempts to impart a "vintage character" to contact prints "without intentionally distressing" the image, has culminated in coating my own plates. So far, I am very pleased with the progress made in that direction. I just wish I had more time to play.

One characteristic of many vintage photographs is that the current color of the paper that was used is almost exactly the color of a manilla file folder. If you can match that color your doing quite well. That color probably differs a bit from the color of the paper when it was first used. The color of Sepia toning and a non-gloss surface are also very common characteristics for many vintage photographs.

Tim Meisburger
2-Jan-2014, 21:22
Just put Jac on your ignore list, as all he ever does is insult people. Pointless.

ryanmills
2-Jan-2014, 22:44
Ryan,

You're on the right track. Don't worry about the occasional rock-in-the-road. They're inevitable. We just go around them, and continue on our way.

Of topic . . . With regard to the web-site you mentioned, for myself, I am not particularly keen on "modern distressed photography". Obviously being contrived, the "special effects" immediately take away from the image. The first thing I notice is the grunge and distressed appearance that was intentionally added to "impress the viewer". I'm sure it has a following. I'm just not in that group. And now on to the intent of my post . . .

I can't tell you what modern papers will give you the character that you seek for your contact prints, but I have collected a small number of "original prints" from the period mentioned. Most are portraits by well known portrait artists of the time. I'm sure you are aware that a vintage photograph rarely has the appearance of a "modern print" that have been distressed. That's probably why modern prints look like they were made yesterday. ;-) Anyhoo, I'd be glad to provide details of the characteristics of the papers they used, image characteristics, their current visual appearance, and I could provide scans if that helps. My own attempts to impart a "vintage character" to contact prints "without intentionally distressing" the image, has culminated in coating my own plates. So far, I am very pleased with the progress made in that direction. I just wish I had more time to play.

One characteristic of many vintage photographs is that the current color of the paper that was used is almost exactly the color of a manilla file folder. If you can match that color your doing quite well. That color probably differs a bit from the color of the paper when it was first used. The color of Sepia toning and a non-gloss surface are also very common characteristics for many vintage photographs.

Thanks, a lot his work on the website is rather overdone but there are a number im just fascinated by. I do love a perfect clean print but I have wanted to shoot something that felt more late 1800's to 1910's I have tried with a few different films, pushing to extremes but nothing looked quite right just scanning. Too much range, too sharp. This is one example I thought was quite a good "aged" look: http://www.clavijo.ru/_images/al42.jpg

I have a 4x5 enlarger a kind local gentleman gave me but its missing a few parts. I got a 4x5 contact frame and figure I will use the enlargers head to try some contact prints and toning.

I did find some "contact" paper and figure I will start with that and see what results I get, going to try with Foma Fomatol LQN: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/428282-Foma-Fomalux-312-Resin-Coated-Grade-2-(Contact-Speed)-8x10-25-sheets

Thanks for the info on warm tone papers, I will have to look around some more.

DannL
2-Jan-2014, 22:57
I'm sure you're aware, that you don't need to use special papers to make contact prints. If you are using your enlarger for example, any enlarging paper will suffice. But you are concerned with paper color and surface texture to get an older character. One option for color is to soak your print in coffee (coffee staining, or tea staining) after the print is made. Something you might research. I've only stained a couple prints that way.

mdm
2-Jan-2014, 23:04
Try salt printing. Fun and fairly straight forward. Using a glass rod, puddle pusher, side of a jar or brush, Coat berger cot 320 with salt and sodium citrate solution, dry in a few minutes, coat with silver nitrate solution, dry briefly, expose to the sun in a contact frame. It is a printing out process so you can see the image forming as it is exposed by opening half of the frame back. If its a keeper fix and tone with gold chloride or any other toner. The Salt Printing Manual by Ellie Young is the authorative guide. An unfixed salt print is truly special (but fugitive unless stored in the dark and viewed seldom in dim light) and a fixed print will give you the look you are after. You dont need a dark room, just a cupboard and draw the curtains while working, dim natural room light is fine. Matte finish. Albumen will be glossy and have a higher dmax.

107566107567

ryanmills
2-Jan-2014, 23:31
I'm sure you're aware, that you don't need to use special papers to make contact prints. If you are using your enlarger for example, any enlarging paper will suffice. But you are concerned with paper color and surface texture to get an older character. One option for color is to soak your print in coffee (coffee staining, or tea staining) after the print is made. Something you might research. I've only stained a couple prints that way.

I have heard of tea and coffee staining but I have never tried it, will have to add that to the list as well.




Try salt printing. Fun and fairly straight forward. Using a glass rod, puddle pusher, side of a jar or brush, Coat berger cot 320 with salt and sodium citrate solution, dry in a few minutes, coat with silver nitrate solution, dry briefly, expose to the sun in a contact frame. It is a printing out process so you can see the image forming as it is exposed by opening half of the frame back. If its a keeper fix and tone with gold chloride or any other toner. The Salt Printing Manual by Ellie Young is the authorative guide. An unfixed salt print is truly special (but fugitive unless stored in the dark and viewed seldom in dim light) and a fixed print will give you the look you are after. You dont need a dark room, just a cupboard and draw the curtains while working, dim natural room light is fine. Matte finish. Albumen will be glossy and have a higher dmax.

107566107567

I have seen salt prints but never really tried it, looks like it could be fun too. Thanks for the book reference!

Patrick13
3-Jan-2014, 14:43
Part of that old timey look is the ortho film instead of panchromatic and how color relationships are rendered because of that, is it not? Especially if portraits are involved.

Jim Noel
3-Jan-2014, 16:57
The base color of most papers as far back as 1900 was white, not the color of a manila folder. I have prints from as early as 1901 and the paper is white. when I began photography about 1937 the paper was from warm white to very white. The common contact papers of the period were made by Agfa, Kodak, Ilford and several small manufacturers. The paper color was also true for enlarging paper. Most producers provided a wide variety of print colors and some were on rather warm bases, but they were not the color of manila folders. Generally the color of the prints was produced by the chemistry in the emulsion.

DannL
4-Jan-2014, 00:27
The base color of most papers as far back as 1900 was white, not the color of a manila folder. I have prints from as early as 1901 and the paper is white. when I began photography about 1937 the paper was from warm white to very white. The common contact papers of the period were made by Agfa, Kodak, Ilford and several small manufacturers. The paper color was also true for enlarging paper. Most producers provided a wide variety of print colors and some were on rather warm bases, but they were not the color of manila folders. Generally the color of the prints was produced by the chemistry in the emulsion.

Jim, I would agree if it weren't for the fact that many professionally made photographs in "my" little collection, which were collected from many different sources, exhibit a tint similar to what I have mentioned. I also have other photographs, cabinet cards, etc that though not manilla in color, their paper cold be described closer to light-tan than anything else. I would also note that these prints "to me" would look somewhat odd if the paper was white. The tint which I have simply described as manilla I suspect was imparted upon the papers because of age, use of non-acid-free papers, and how they where stored, in drawers, in files, in picture frames, etc. My original point being in my previous post was . . . "What characteristics do many 100 year old prints have today, that make them appear vintage?" One characteristic is the color of the paper, another would be the process that was used, and another still would be the subject photographed. I can't recall ever seeing a print that is over 100 years old that is on paper that is still white. I would "like" to say they are white, but with a little color matching it is obviously not white. Jim, are a majority of prints that are over 100 years old to which you have access, that were originally printed on white paper, do they still retain their original white color with no evidence of aging? If so, I am very curious as to the source of such prints and any storage histories that would account for them not showing age. This is actually an interesting topic for me . . . "The deterioration of prints over time, and how they survive and how they age". For grins I will scan some of these that I own, just to demonstrate how these prints have aged. If nothing else, it should be fun. And who knows, I may learn here that I am colored blind, and that manilla is actually white. ;-)

DannL
4-Jan-2014, 02:27
Jim, You are correct, and I will stand corrected. The paper is not quite manilla in color when scanned. It is interesting that when observing the color card I made (manilla next to white), and viewing the photographs under a florescent bulb, they appear very similar in hue to the manilla patch. But when scanned the yellow in the manilla patch becomes more evident. Below is a link to a number of period photographs (1900-1921) that I could scan this evening. With the Dorothy Stanley Emmons photo (1910), I also scanned the back to show how closely it matches. There is only one modern photograph of my own making, that I inserted as a reference to demonstrate how "white" paper base appears against the actual aged photographs. That photograph stands out like a sore thumb. The vintage photographs presented here where acquired from across the U.S., coast to coast, over the past 8 years.

Here are a number of examples. (https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=4A56ED3A3048758A!147&authkey=!ADATms4LYVPAmXM&ithint=folder%2c.jpg)

I will let others name that color. I almost want to call it "peach". But, in any case, I thumbed through the rest of my photographs and could not find one that still retained a white appearance. Everything from Tan, to peach, to almost manilla (but not quite so yellow apparently).

And here is a comparison patch I made of four of the paper colors against white (middle patch), taken from some of the photograph scans in the examples presented above. This is non-scientific, of course.

107632

jb7
4-Jan-2014, 06:01
bottom right, taupe- bottom left, it's a bit like mustard, English, though maybe not yellow enough.
top two, beige. Beiges. Though nobody likes that word, so it would be called 'Heritage' something or other.
Which, in this case, might not be far off the mark.

Good work on the colour scanning, very informative, thank you-

DannL
4-Jan-2014, 10:25
I made another batch of photographs to hopefully represent them better as they might appear under daylight conditions. Of course everyone's monitor will differ. New batch found here. (https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=4A56ED3A3048758A!162&authkey=!AFj339hGr5QA1E0&ithint=folder%2c.jpg) I felt it necessary to reduce the red slightly. I also added one photograph (the waterfall) that when viewed alone, has the appearance of being on white paper. But, when the photograph is viewed against a true white patch, it's easy to see how our eyes (my eyes) can be fooled.

Original 107654 Adjusted107655

DannL
4-Jan-2014, 11:17
bottom right, taupe- bottom left, it's a bit like mustard, English, though maybe not yellow enough.
top two, beige. Beiges. Though nobody likes that word, so it would be called 'Heritage' something or other.
Which, in this case, might not be far off the mark.

Good work on the colour scanning, very informative, thank you-

jb7, now you get to try your hand at color naming again. ;-) I think the taupe color (hue) would be good in describing the general color for these photographs.