PDA

View Full Version : Which Pyro Dev for Enlarging 4x5 on VC Paper?



G Benaim
27-Nov-2006, 14:59
Hello,

I've been meaning to try pyro for a while, and figured I'd order some on my next freestyle order. They only carry W2D2, not HD-cat, and PMK, I believe. I enlarge 4x5 onto VC paper, and dev in Tanks and Hangers. I've been using Rodinal so far, on trad films, and would like to retain its sharpness and gain Pyro's stain. What would you reccomend? Thanks.

Donald Miller
27-Nov-2006, 15:09
I would say that ABC pyro would be the sharpest of the pyro developers that I have used. The trade off is increased grain. I wouldn't use it with condenser enlargers or large size prints.

steve simmons
27-Nov-2006, 15:16
PMK does not work well with hangers. I have done tray processing since about 78 or 79. My tray processing procedure is described in an article in the Free Articles section of the view camera web site

www.viewamera.com


There is also an article about staining developers in the Free Articles section as well. It does not compare them - that will always be an endless debate - but talks about how they work.


steve simmons

Eric Rose
27-Nov-2006, 15:18
You will get as many opinions as there are pyro developers. Personally I use PyroCat-HD. I use both diffusion and condenser enlargers depending on the neg and what I want the print to look like. In my experience it is very sharp and has very little grain. I use tanks and hangers as well. YMMV.

Pyro developers are cheap. Buy a bunch of them and try them out. Or just pick 3 and give them a whirl. It seems if you use tap water the results vary depending on where you are from. So PC-HD might be the cats behind for me but give you lousy results.

So have I managed to say a lot without saying anything LOL?

Jay DeFehr
27-Nov-2006, 15:52
Any pyro developer will be at least as sharp as Rodinal, but not all are compatible with tanks and hangers, as Steve points out. Of the developers mentioned, I would recommend WD2D. Good luck.

Jay

Henry Ambrose
27-Nov-2006, 16:15
Pyrocat HD will work well. For negatives intended to print on VC papers you should add a bit of Sodium Sulfite when mixing the two developer solutions. This will remove any stain which might act like a filter when printing.

I know you said you wanted stain but be aware that you might get unintended tonal changes in your prints from the stain color. It may not be immediately apparent but sooner or later you'll make a print that "looks funny" then you'll know why you want the stain color to go away for printing on VC papers.

Obviously you'll have to test this for yourself but one-half to one teaspoon of Sodium Sulfite per liter or quart of 1:1:100 Pyrocat HD working solution should do the trick. Spoon measure is fine, just do it the same every time. Your times will vary from standard Pyrocat HD times as the Sodium Sulfite will make the developer more active. You'll gain film speed over Rodinol and still have super sharp grain.

This thread has a bit of info on the subject of staining developers and VC paper printing:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=16066&highlight=pyrocat

steve simmons
27-Nov-2006, 16:28
"I know you said you wanted stain but be aware that you might get unintended tonal changes in your prints from the stain color. It may not be immediately apparent but sooner or later you'll make a print that "looks funny" then you'll know why you want the stain color to go away for printing on VC papers."

The stain is one of the primary advantages of a staining developer - especially with VC paper. If you don' want it don't use a staining develper. All of the staining formulae have been created to give a stain for a reason. Read the article in the Free Articles section of the view camera web site to understand how the stain works and why it has advantages.

I would also get a copy of The Book of Pyro by Gordon Hutchings. Regardless of which formula you use, or not, it has a lot of good info on how a staining developer works.

steve simmons

sanking
27-Nov-2006, 16:40
Hello,

I've been meaning to try pyro for a while, and figured I'd order some on my next freestyle order. They only carry W2D2, not HD-cat, and PMK, I believe. I enlarge 4x5 onto VC paper, and dev in Tanks and Hangers. I've been using Rodinal so far, on trad films, and would like to retain its sharpness and gain Pyro's stain. What would you reccomend? Thanks.

WD2D, PMK, and ABC Pyro are pyrogallol based developers. Most pyrogallol based developers, and specifriclaly these three, require a fairly vigorous agitation scheulde to assure even development. This is *very* difficult to achieve with tanks and hangers.

Of the developers you mention Pyrocat-HD, which is pyrocatechin based, is IMO by far your best choice. Plus, this developer has a proven record in the literature, reported by many disinterested third parties, of giving even development along with high acutance, in minimal and stand development procedures. A pyrogallol based developer that contains ascorbic acid, such as Rollo Pyro, might also work for you, but so far as I know there is little or no documentation to say for sure that it would.


Sandy King

steve simmons
27-Nov-2006, 17:21
"WD2D, PMK, and ABC Pyro are pyrogallol based developers. Most pyrogallol based developers, and specifriclaly these three, require a fairly vigorous agitation scheulde to assure even development. This is *very* difficult to achieve with tanks and hangers. "

I agree with the reference to hangers being a problem but not with the need for vigorous agitation. My tray processing technique is a slow but continuous agitation that has worked for Pyrogallol and pyroctechin developers.

As for which one is best that will always be an endless debate. The PMK has been around for 25 years and has worked for hundreds, perhaps, thousands of photographers and its success is also well documented. It was tested by a great many photographers for more than 10 years before it was released to the public. The Book of Pyro has come the best modern reference on staining developers regardless of which formulae you use.

Don't let us get into an acrimonious debate about which one is best - it is a debate that will never end. The new pyocatechol formulae did not go through the years of testing that the PMK did and have undergone a series of improvements since their release to the public. I have been doing this for 25+ years, I have tried most of the formula but did not create any of them. I intially tried ABC and then went to the W2D2 and then to PMK. In the mid 80s I tried the pyrocetechin formulae but did not like them as well for general use and they generally are not as stable. The W2D2 and PMK formulae were significant impovements over previous formulae, user friendly, and have stood the test of time. The W2D2 was recently revised into W2D2+. You rarely hear about problems with either formulae. I have not tried the new S10 formula which is a single solution developer that is mixed with water.

If you want to do roller processing I suggest the Rollo Pyro which is a variation of PMK specifically created for roller drum processing. Here the increased agitation with roller processing did create some problems with the PMK and the Rollo formula solves these. This is why I disagree that PMK requires vigorous agitation. It does not.

steve simmons

sanking
27-Nov-2006, 18:05
"I agree with the reference to hangers being a problem but not with the need for vigorous agitation. My tray processing technique is a slow but continuous agitation that has worked for Pyrogallol and pyroctechin developers.


steve simmons

So what is vigorous? Gordon Hutchings in The Book of Pyro recommends an agitation cycle of two complete inversions every 15 seconds with development in tank, and notes that this interval should not exceed 20 seconds. I consider this to be an example of vigorous agitation. I also consider shuffle agitation, where the film is moved every one or two seconds, which Simmons espouses, an example of fairly vigorous agitation. A normal agitation period, by my understanding, is one where the film rests without agitation for 30-60 seconds.

The plain fact of the matter is that Hutchins is right in that "A pyro staining developer (read PMK since that is what he is talking about) has a tendency to streak and mottle negatives," unless it receives adequate agitation, which by his own explanation involves 6-8 complete inversions in tank, or the equivalent, every minute. That is "vigorous" by my understanding of the word, at least as it applies to development of film.

Fortunately, what Hutchins writes about PMK is not true of all pyro staining developers. It is not true of Pyrocat-HD, and I also believe it would not be true of pyrogallol based developers that also contain ascorbic acid.


Sandy King

Jay DeFehr
27-Nov-2006, 18:52
I must have misunderstood the original poster, I thought he was faced with the choice of either PMK or WD2D, and not Pyrocat HD. Pyrocat HD would surely work as well as either of the others, and probably better. There are some very sound and well documented reasons why developers like Pyrocat HD and 510-Pyro don't suffer from uneven development, and developers like PMK and ABC Pyro do that have nothing to do with the choice of catechol or pyrogallol, but I don't want to get into another pyrobitchfest, so I'll just say that if Pyrocat HD is an option for the original poster, he would be better served by it than the other options mentioned, and if he could choose any staining developer, I would recommend 510-Pyro.

Jay

steve simmons
27-Nov-2006, 19:01
I do not consider my tray procesing procedure an example of vigorous agitation.Roller drum processing is much more vigorous. Slow, even shuffling in a tray does not seem like a vigorous activity to me. Contiuous yes but not vigorous.

Again, I have not invented any of these formulae and don't care what people use. I have my preference after 25 years of experience and I will let my previous post stand since it is factual and historically accurate. To often these debates end up hostile and nasty and I don't want to go down that road.

steve simmons

Andrew O'Neill
27-Nov-2006, 19:47
So, the moral of the story is choose a pyro developer and try it out. If you like it, stick with it. If you don't, try another one. For most of the pyro developers, you can mix them up yourself. Cheaper in the long run...I'm a cheapskate.

steve simmons
27-Nov-2006, 20:04
Andrew

I agree, there is never going to be agreement as to which is best. Other than a few guidelines such a don't do PMK in a roller drum.

IMHO the staining developers have a lot of advantages.

steve simmons

Eric Biggerstaff
27-Nov-2006, 20:14
With regards to what type of developer or which is best, there will never be agreement on any of them, staining or non staining. All types of developers work well and great images have been made with non staining and staining alike. I think what it comes down to is choosing one or two, use them often, get to know them, stick with them and then stop thinking about it - just go photograph. In the end, the image is what matters not the developer used to make it.

sanking
27-Nov-2006, 20:24
Andrew

I agree, there is never going to be agreement as to which is best. Other than a few guidelines such a don't do PMK in a roller drum.

IMHO the staining developers have a lot of advantages.

steve simmons

I agree that the staining developers have a lot of advantages.

I also agree that there is never going to be agreement as to which is best.

And it is a good thing that View Camera promotes the use of staining developers.

That said, when specific questions are asked as to which developer would work best in a given type of situation, some answers are better than others. From the start of this thread I assumed that we were discussing a very specific type of situation, and responded accordingly. If I had understood that we were discussing generalites we might be reminded that D-76 is still very good if you don't have any good reason to use something else.



Sandy King

Henry Ambrose
27-Nov-2006, 22:03
The stain is one of the primary advantages of a staining developer - especially with VC paper. If you don' want it don't use a staining develper.

No Steve,
Stain of a color that creates filtration effect on VC paper is not an advantage. Not unless you serendiptiously happen onto a scene that looks better with the built in filtration from the stain. And its just as likely as not that the stain will help or hurt the picture - you won't know until you look at multiple prints made this way and see what is really happening. At that point a stain color that gives filtration effects on your VC paper won't look like such a good thing.

And I know you know a lot and have long experience but read the link I provided and think about the color of the stain from different developers. What I wrote will make sense at that point - that is if you've ever printed much with Pyrocat negs on VC paper. There's more to it than your blanket statement.

G Benaim,
Sorry for not reading the original question carefully. I notice now that you were asking about choices between two other developers, not Pyrocat HD. But anyway it'll work well and give sharp crisp grain if thats part of what you like about your current Rodinol negatives.

Hans Berkhout
27-Nov-2006, 22:45
Use what you can readily acquire and use it for a year or so, then judge. Contrary to what the experts tend to recommend, I use W2D2 for 100Tmax, in an old-model Jobo inversion tank. Continous agitation during the first minute, three inversions every following minute. I am fairly obsessive nitpicking finnicky etc, my results are very satisfying.
I think this discussion cannot be complete without reference to which film is being used.

steve simmons
28-Nov-2006, 07:52
IMHO to use a staining developer and then take extra steps to kill/minimize the stain seems like extra work to come out with less. I would be interested to hear what Sandy and Jay feel about this.

Oe of the disadvantages to adding extra Sulfite is that it wil reduce sharpness as doing so softens grain

steve simmons

Scott Davis
28-Nov-2006, 08:40
It is possible, but most likely not advisable, to use PMK in rotary processing. The solution to allow this is an ugly one- mix up a lot more developer and fill the tank so there is less air in the tube/drum, which reduces the oxidation caused by the continuous agitation. Another downside is that you'll probably nuke your negs, and have some REALLY dense film. While PMK Pyro is a good overall developer, it is less than ideal for VC printing, because it forms an overall stain, not a proportional stain, which then acts as a neutral density filter.

G Benaim
28-Nov-2006, 08:53
Steve S,

What advantages does PMK have over the other 2, and why won't it work w hangers?

Sandy,

I've read your article and posts re HD and am happy to try it, but livingg overseas I wanted to get all my stuff from Freestyle, and they don't carry it. Who does sell it and can ship overseas?

Hans,

As I mentioned, I use traditional emulsions, HP5, FP4 and Foma 200 in 4x5.

Re stain, what problems are particular to VC papers, and which developer are better or worse?

steve simmons
28-Nov-2006, 08:54
"While PMK Pyro is a good overall developer, it is less than ideal for VC printing, because it forms an overall stain, not a proportional stain, which then acts as a neutral density filter."

This statement is simply incorrect. Everyone who has used the developers and studied them understands that the stain is proportional to the silver density. If the stain simply acted as a neutral density filter there would be no advantage to using a staining developer.

I suggest that you read the article on staining developers in the Sept/Oct 06 issue and Hutchings' The Book of Pyro.

steve simmons

Scott Davis
28-Nov-2006, 09:05
Steve- I HAVE been using pyro developers, both PMK and Pyrocat, for a number of years now. PMK forms a higher base stain which is not proportionate with the density. There is a greater amount of stain present in the shadows than there needs to be/should be relative to the silver density. Also, the color of the stain in PMK is too close to that of the green-sensitive layer of a VC paper emulsion. This creates a flattening effect when printing on VC papers. I have the Book Of Pyro, and I have read it. Several Times. I have also read the article in View Camera. PMK is a beautiful developer for contact printing on graded paper, where the color of the light does not act as a contrast filter. No developer is a magic bullet, one-size-fits-all solution.

steve simmons
28-Nov-2006, 09:05
We've posted the article on staining developers in the Free Articles section of our web site

www.vewcamera.com

Read and decide for yourself. Staining developers work very well with VC papers.

Bostick and Sullivan and Photographers Formuary carry most of the staining developer formulae. They also have the Hutchings book

The PMK formula has been used for 25 years by many, many photographers and there ar very few reported problems. It dos not workwell with hanger becasue the holes in the hangers create surge marks. Trays is the perfect way to use PMK There is article on tray development in the Free Articles Section as well.

steve simmons

sanking
28-Nov-2006, 09:38
Steve S,

What advantages does PMK have over the other 2, and why won't it work w hangers?

Sandy,

I've read your article and posts re HD and am happy to try it, but livingg overseas I wanted to get all my stuff from Freestyle, and they don't carry it. Who does sell it and can ship overseas?

Hans,

As I mentioned, I use traditional emulsions, HP5, FP4 and Foma 200 in 4x5.

Re stain, what problems are particular to VC papers, and which developer are better or worse?

Lotus Camera sells Pyrocat-HD.


Sandy

sanking
28-Nov-2006, 10:03
IMHO to use a staining developer and then take extra steps to kill/minimize the stain seems like extra work to come out with less. I would be interested to hear what Sandy and Jay feel about this.

Oe of the disadvantages to adding extra Sulfite is that it wil reduce sharpness as doing so softens grain

steve simmons

I don't routinely promote the use of Pyrocat-HD as a non-staining developer. However, there are some situations where no stain is better. For example, if your film has higher than normal B+F and you are developing for alternative printing the stain will greatly increase the amount of B+F stain and make printing times very long. High speed emulsion films and many of the East European films, especially if over a couple of years old, generally have fairly elevated B+F and develoment in a staining developer for printing with alternative processes might be counter-productive.

When sulfite is used in large amount in a developer, as in D76, there is a solvent action which may degrade sharpness, and make the grain appear finer. However, it takes a lot of sulfite to make this happen, and with Pyrocat-HD the one or two teaspoons of sulfite needed to make the developer non-staining should not reduce sharpness.

Regarding the effect of stain on VC papers, one of the things that is not well understood by folks using staining developers, even some with a lot of experience, is that the use of a VC filter over #3.5 (magenta) blocks virtually all green light. If you think abot this you will undestand that the highlight compensation that is characteristic of staining developers with VC papers disappears when you go beyond a #3 1/2 filter because the green sensitive part of the VC emulsion is no longer affected by the light. So in order to take advantage of the stain to compress the highlights you must develop the negative to a very high CI (much higher than would be needed for a Grade 2 paper) that will allow you to make adjustment to contrast with the low number VC filters that pass green light. Unfortunately this kind of thing is conceptually not easy to understand, and harder still to explain to someone else.


Sandy

steve simmons
28-Nov-2006, 10:09
PMK stain is proportional. There are two stains - fog stain and image stain. Some films like HP5+ have a greater overall stain (fog stain) but still has a proportional stain. Most other films have less fog stain than HP5+ but all films develop a proportional stain with PMK.

There is a level of stain everywhere that does act as a neutral density. But there is also a proportional stain that increases as the silver denity increases. But with VC paper, which has two layers that are sensitive to different color of light. The color of the stain differentialy limits the color spectrum of the light from the enlarger and affects the different layers of the emulsion in the VC paprs. IMHO it is the perfect film developer to print onto VC papers.

steve simmons

steve simmons

G Benaim
28-Nov-2006, 10:13
Regarding the effect of stain on VC papers, one of the things that is not well understood by folks using staining developers, even some with a lot of experience, is that the use of a VC filter over #3.5 (magenta) blocks virtually all green light. If you think abot this you will undestand that the highlight compensation that is characteristic of staining developers with VC papers disappears when you go beyond a #3 1/2 filter because the green sensitive part of the VC emulsion is no longer affected by the light. So in order to take advantage of the stain to compress the highlights you must develop the negative to a very high CI (much higher than would be needed for a Grade 2 paper) that will allow you to make adjustment to contrast with the low number VC filters that pass green light. Unfortunately this kind of thing is conceptually not easy to understand, and harder still to explain to someone else.


Sandy

So, Sandy, if you were enlarging on VC papers, which dev would you use normally, staining or non?

sanking
28-Nov-2006, 10:35
So, Sandy, if you were enlarging on VC papers, which dev would you use normally, staining or non?

Briefly, I would definitely use a staining developer in high contrast scenes, and especially with films like TRI-X 320 (and Efke/Adox PL 100) that have a flaring shoulder. Most films, however, would benefit to some extent from the type of highlight compressions you get with VC papers and stain.

I would also use a staining developer in normal contrast scenes. However, with this type of scene the films that would benefit most from stain woud be films like TRI-X 320. However, the benefits of the stain are not great in this type of scene with most films on VC papers.

For low contrast scenes there is nothing to be gained in terms of tonal values with a staining developer so in this sense a non-staining developer would work equally well. However, staining developers tan and harden the emulsion, which does all sorts of things to increase apparent sharpness, even though the difference may not be visible unless you enlarge over 5X or so.

Bear in mind there is some speculation here because I am an alternative printer and don't often print with VC papers. I have, however, done a fair amount of testing of VC papers with staining developers out of curiosity and an interest in understanding how the combination works.

Sandy King

lee\c
28-Nov-2006, 10:55
I am not Sandy but I use pyrocat hd for printing on VC paper. I use it with Efke PL 100 and with FP4. I use the dilution of 2+2+100 I use a motor base and a Unicolor Drum . I like a thick neg and Pyrocat HD gives me that. I print on a Durst 138s condenser enlarger and I also have an Omega D2 with an Aristo VCL 4500 head on it. I was a PMK user for about 8 or 10 years. I moved to Pyrocat because I was having a hard time getting the contrast out of the negs that I wanted when I used PMK. I was using a lot of HP5+ and the Aristo brand of HP5+ from Freestyle. Since I changed to Pyrocat HD any issues I have had have been self-inflicted. YMMD

lee\c

Brian Ellis
28-Nov-2006, 13:11
It's fine with me if people use whatever developer they like. But FWIW I found no advantage to using PMK in trays with HP5+ film and printing on Kodak Polymax Fine Art paper. Perhaps it has advantages with other materials or maybe other people do things differently than I did or maybe other types of staining developers would have been better with those materials or perhaps the scenes I photographed weren't such as to allow its advantages to be observed. But whatever the reason, with the photographs I made, using the materials and methodology I used, there was no apparent advantage to that particular staining developer.

When I say "no apparent advantage" I mean that I made sets of duplicate negatives of the same scenes, processed one set in PMK and the other in my standard developer (D76), made 11x14 prints, and there was no noticeable difference between the two sets of prints. This is an oversimplification, there was a good bit of testing and other work involved (e.g. study of Gordon Hutchings' book) but that's it in a nut-shell.

I also note in passing that of the people whose darkroom work I've observed and who I consider to be master printers (Bruce Barnbaum, John Sexton, and Craig Stephens), plus Phil Davis who probably isn't a master printer but who knows photographic materials very well, none used or recommended a staining developer. I don't mention that to suggest that these people are "right" and anyone who uses a staining developer is "wrong." There certainly have been some outstanding photographers who did use staining developers, Edward Weston and Paul Strand come to mind. I mention it just as an observation that there isn't a unanimity of views about the benefits of staining developers.

Jay DeFehr
28-Nov-2006, 13:32
Hello everyone.

I'm in the middle of an in-depth investigation into the effects of staining developers on VC papers, and what I'm learning has surprised me in many ways. It's too early to form concrete conclusions, but what I can say with some confidence is that staining developers are indeed compatible with VC papers, and there are no differences in the VC paper printing characteristics of negatives developed in catechol or pyrogallol developers. When I finish this work, I hope to provide some much needed clarity on the subject of staining developers and VC papers, and some practical advice on how best to manage the issues involved. Regarding the elimination of the staining action of a staining developer, Those who have read the View Camera article might remember that Sandy and I essentially made the same point, which he has repeated here, about fogged films. The deeper question of whether a staining developer with the stain eliminated is the best non-staining developer to use, might be as much a matter of practical convenience as anything else. Since I believe the effect of the added sulfite required to eliminate the stain would be sufficient to warrant re-testing, I would consider the non-staining version a separate developer, albeit, a very conveniently made one. I believe Sandy keeps some PC-TEA around for his non-staining needs, which might be even more convenient than modifying another developer. Much has been made of the general stain issue, particularly as it applies to PMK, but I think it's worth saying that unless one is printing with UV processes, the issue is mostly academic. The only consequence of the general stain is that it will add a little printing time, which isn't generally a problem for silver printers, unless they've significantly overexposed their film. Properly exposed and processed PMK negs print beautifully on VC papers.

Jay

sanking
28-Nov-2006, 19:40
I also note in passing that of the people whose darkroom work I've observed and who I consider to be master printers (Bruce Barnbaum, John Sexton, and Craig Stephens), plus Phil Davis who probably isn't a master printer but who knows photographic materials very well, none used or recommended a staining developer. I don't mention that to suggest that these people are "right" and anyone who uses a staining developer is "wrong." There certainly have been some outstanding photographers who did use staining developers, Edward Weston and Paul Strand come to mind. I mention it just as an observation that there isn't a unanimity of views about the benefits of staining developers.

I don't believe many pyro users would claim there is unanimity of views about the benefits of staining developers. To the contrary, there are many skeptics and many who simply dismiss staining developers out of hand. I have done the same type of comparision tests you did and agree that it is very hard to see any advantage in the print made from a stained negative. But if you really want to do this, you have to choose an appropriate scene. If, for example, you are printing on VC papers choose a scene with very high contrast, or choose a scene strongly backlighted with some delicate detail, say tree branches againt the sune. Or, if you do resolution tests, compare resolution in lppm on Tmax-100 with a chrome on glass resolution target. If you do any of these things you will, IMO, find some advantage with the pyro stained negative.

Howver, even if there were no advantage at all to staining developers I would still be inclined to use them because of economy of use and because of the fact that the stock solutions are so stable. PMK stock solutions last for years, as will Pyrocat-HD stock solutions mixed in glycol. Same is true for most of the other modern pyro staining formulas. I used to use D76 but found a lot of inconsistency in results if the developer was stored for any period of time. Plus, compared to developers liks PMK and Pyrocat-HD, D76 is quite expensive, even if you mix it yourself, because of the sulfite.

There are of course some negatives, of which the major one for me would be lack of precision in the use of BTZS when printing with VC papers, *if* I printed with these papers. However, I am an alternative printer and my densitometer reads stain as effective printing density, so BTZS works great for Pt./Pd. printing with stained negatives. Another negative is that some of the formulas, PMK and WD2D+ for example, are really not optimized for use with rotary processing or in BTZS type tubes, though they can be made to work with special procedures, i.e. a small amount of ascorbic or sulfite. But other formulas work great in rotary processing right out of the box with no hassle, including Rollo Pyro, Pyrocat-HD, and Jay DeFehr's 510-Pyro.

Anyway, I really don't care what people use, whether staining or non-staining, or if staining, which formula. In the end I am much more interested in making prints than making negatives, and I could make beautiful carbon, kallitype and Pt./Pd. prints with any well-exposed and developed negative, whatever the developer. Or with digital negatives for that matter, which I work with often since my typical working method these days is to scan the original negative, correct in Photoshop, and print a digital negative to print with. And stained negatives also scan very well, at least as well as non-stained negatives.

And on that note I am attaching an image file of a 7X17 palladium print I just made this evening, on a new paper called Weston. It is a view of the Spanish city of Cuenca, in the region of Spain known as Castilla La Mancha. Original was a 7X17 FP4+ negative, developed in Pyrocat-HD. The negative was scanned, corrected and a digital negative made on the Epson 2200. The palladium print was made from the digital negative.



Sandy King

sanking
29-Nov-2006, 15:09
I am going to post a new file of that image from Cuenca. When I looked at the one I posted yesterday on the monitor I saw that it does not look anything at all like the print. Hopefully this one will be much closer to the print in terms of color and contrast.

Sandy King

Ken Lee
29-Nov-2006, 16:38
I am going to post a new file of that image from Cuenca. When I looked at the one I posted yesterday on the monitor I saw that it does not look anything at all like the print. Hopefully this one will be much closer to the print in terms of color and contrast.

Dunno if you created the image in Photoshop, but if so, and you are planning to post to the web, it's best to choose View > Proof Setup > Monitor RGB, and perform additional corrections, when making the JPG for the web. Since non-Mac (IE those that don't use the Web-Kit rendering engine) browsers don't read embedded ICC profiles, your image is more likely to look good on the browser.

On a related note: Given that Pt/Pd papers have texture, and that texture can reduce the perceived sharpness of an image... if you make a digital negative and then print on such paper, can you tell that the negative was digital ? Or do the printer artifacts disappear into the visual noise of the paper ?

sanking
29-Nov-2006, 17:21
Dunno if you created the image in Photoshop, but if so, and you are planning to post to the web, it's best to choose View > Proof Setup > Monitor RGB, and perform additional corrections, when making the JPG for the web. Since non-Mac (IE those that don't use the Web-Kit rendering engine) browsers don't read embedded ICC profiles, your image is more likely to look good on the browser.

On a related note: Given that Pt/Pd papers have texture, and that texture can reduce the perceived sharpness of an image... if you make a digital negative and then print on such paper, can you tell that the negative was digital ? Or do the printer artifacts disappear into the visual noise of the paper ?

Thanks for the suggestion about preparing an image for web presentation. I know very little about this subject.

Regarding the question about digital negatives, printer artifacts on the negative disappear into the texture of the paper. This is true with Pt./Pd. but would not be true in printing digital negatives on a smooth surface silver gelatin paper. Most of the papers used for Pt./Pd. printing are capable of only about 8 lppm, which is convenient since this is about the same limittion of Epson printers on Pictorico OHP.

My comments are meant to apply only to digital negatives made with printers such as the Epsons 1280, 2200, 2400 and R1800, and other Epson with similar technology.

Sandy King