Making A Silver Print Silver

[rcjtapio]

It seems to me that the argument for making traditional silver prints in the wet darkroom, is that, one can achieve that beautiful silver image that can take your breath away.

But anyone who has printed in the wet darkroom knows that not all silver prints have that luster and silver glow and shine. As a matter of fact, I don't believe it is that easy to do.

I noticed in a recent workshop flyer I received, that it said the workshop could teach you how to make prints that look like silver. (An arguement that this is something that an inkjet process couldn't achieve.)

That got me wondering what exactly it is that makes certain prints really look like silver. Would anyone like to take a stab at the answer or offer an opinion?

Rick Tapio

[percepts]

you are correct. It is difficult. It comes down to making subtle lighting changes in the print which is done by burning and dodging using vignette / gradual fade in or out to lighter/darker areas. That is the skill of it. A lot of people get to a really technically good work print and think the print is finished but really that is just the starting point if you want to make a print that shines.

[bob carnie]

Rick

A great negative with lots of information, a larger negative seems to work better, I prefer to give a lower contrast filter to start and make sure I have a nice range of tones , and then use the 5 filter to set the black.

Making a print look like silver is actually hard to do .

hope this helps

Bob

[ic-racer]

I probably don't under stand the OP, but the silver part of the image is black. So making the print look silver, to me means a low key, dark photograph.

[nolindan]

not all silver prints have that luster and silver glow and shine.

Start with a picture of something that has luster and shine. It doesn't have to be metallic. You can use a picture of the shine on a polished stone floor, a smooth waxy leaf or silky fabric.

Make test strips of the glowing part of the image at various times and contrast grades; use contrast filters (or VC/color head settings) and not split grade techniques. Don't worry about highlights or shadows.

After you have the glow the way you want it - then make a full size test print and dodge/burn/whatever the rest of the print so it looks right.

If you find yourself dodging, burning or 'giving a #5 exposure' to the important part of your image then you have the wrong exposure and contrast. This is the pit that most split-grade printers fall into. The manipulation should be done on the unimportant parts of the image and is only needed so they fall into line and don't draw attention to themselves.

[Greg Blank]

Wow this is "Really" too good to pass up the potential for a multi page flame war :) So here goes;

You absolutely have to use brand xyz film and brand qtr paper coupled with your own formulated cornstarch based developer, organic based acetic acid, and sodium thiosulfate fixer mixed with dehumifier water....collected on Mondays and distilled before the waxing moon.

Aside from those criteria I find that low contrast scenes printed with higher contrast than normal, yield the effect you describe although not always :^)


It seems to me that the argument for making traditional silver prints in the wet darkroom, is that, one can achieve that beautiful silver image that can take your breath away.

But anyone who has printed in the wet darkroom knows that not all silver prints have that luster and silver glow and shine. As a matter of fact, I don't believe it is that easy to do.

I noticed in a recent workshop flyer I received, that it said the workshop could teach you how to make prints that look like silver. (An arguement that this is something that an inkjet process couldn't achieve.)

That got me wondering what exactly it is that makes certain prints really look like silver. Would anyone like to take a stab at the answer or offer an opinion?

Rick Tapio

[Chuck P.]

I know what your're referring to, but IMO, some of Edward Weston's nudes (http://www.edward-weston.com/edward_weston_nudes.htm) have this characteristic. I believe it lies in the subtlety that exists between print values coupled with some print toning effects, but I don't really know---JMO.

[srbphoto]

There is no "magic way". Though I would start with silver gelatin paper :) It is in the eye and patience of the printer.
I had a teacher in school who would push and push the students (even beginners) to make the print better (BTW he was a great printer, his work is very "silver"). You should have heard the comments about him in the darkroom. When it came time for the print reviews, the quality of the printing was better than a lot of the stuff hanging in galleries. I am always disappointed when I see someones work that is compositionally good but the lack of printing skill (or drive) hurts the print.
I find it funny that some will criticize someone like Weston or Adams but have never seen a print in person. Only in books, calendars or online. It does make a difference.

[Merg Ross]

I know what your're referring to, but IMO, some of Edward Weston's nudes (http://www.edward-weston.com/edward_weston_nudes.htm) have this characteristic. I believe it lies in the subtlety that exists between print values coupled with some print toning effects, but I don't really know---JMO.

No toning involved. Simply a case of natural light, a properly exposed and processed negative, printed by contact. Isopan film, ABC Pyro, silver chloride paper. And, a good eye.

[Mark Sawyer]

I we're talking about "that luster and silver glow and shine", I think there are two parts that work together...

There is the surface of the paper, and depends on the choice of paper, developer, hardener, toner, how it is dried, and any other treatments to the surface, (remember waxed prints?)

How the tonal scale is rendered is affected by both paper and film choices, developer choices for both, exposure, development time, agitation, and temperature, waterbaths during negative or print development, lens and filter on the camera and the enlarger, the enlarger's design (diffusion/condenser/coldhead?), bleaching, toning, and especially the light and the subject itself...

Different things seem to work for different people. And some people go to great lengths to duplicate the materials and methods of another photographer, but never get that "look"...

I think finding the materials that seem to fit, getting to know them well, and getting your negatives juuuuust right will get you there...

(but that part about the negatives is easier said than done...)

[Paul Metcalf]

It is in the eye and patience of the printer. And at least equally in the eye of the viewer.